ABSTRACT
This study explores the experiences and coping strategies of female frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) fighting the COVID-19 pandemic in resource-constrained settings. Female frontline HCWs face an elevated risk of contracting the COVID-19 infection and infecting their loved ones because when they return from work. The study adopted a qualitative approach to explore the experiences of female frontline HCWs working in high-volume departments at Bindura provincial hospital in Zimbabwe. Using purposive sampling, 15 participants were recruited. HCWs were asked to share their views and perspectives on COVID-19 and their work environment. The study focused on HCWs' experiences of stigma and discrimination once infected;access to treatment;understanding of transmission;and life experiences of living with COVID-19. The findings suggest that female HCWs working in high-volume departments experience a higher risk of exposure to infection, barriers to assessing personal protective equipment (PPE) and stigma, which impact their mental health. However, despite the complex interrelated challenges female frontline HCWs face in Zimbabwe, there are limited interventions to ameliorate this burden, a knowledge gap this research aims to illuminate.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Previous research has demonstrated the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic emergency on the wellbeing of healthcare workers. However, few research contributions reported a longitudinal evaluation of psychological distress and examined determinants of its duration and course over time. The present study aims to explore the impact of the pandemic emergency on HCWs mental health by adopting a longitudinal design and assessing mental health as combination of overlapping clinical symptoms (post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety). Methods: Data were collected weekly through a mobile application during and after the first wave of COVID-19 in the province of Quebec, Canada, in 2020. Analysis was conducted on a final sample of 382 participants. Participants were grouped into "resilient" (RES) if they did not manifest clinical-level psychological distress during monitoring, "short-term distress" (STD) if distress exceeded the clinical threshold for 1-3 weeks, and longer-term distress (LTD) if it occurred for four or more weeks, even if not consecutively. Descriptive statistics for all variables were computed for each subgroup (RES, STD and LTD), and pairwise comparisons between each group for every descriptive variable were made using chi square statistics for categorical variables and t-test for continuous variables. Predictors of distress groups (STD and LTD vs RES) were assessed running multinomial hierarchical logistic regression models. Results: In our sample, almost two third (59.4%) HCWs did not manifest moderate or severe distress during the monitoring time. Short-term distress, mostly post-traumatic symptoms that lasted for less than 4 weeks, were the most common distress response, affecting almost one third of participants. Longer psychological distress occurred only in a smaller percentage (12.6%) of cases, as a combination of severe posttraumatic, depressive and anxiety symptoms. Perceived occupational stress was the most significant risk factor; moreover individual, peritraumatic work and family risk and protective factors, were likely to significantly affect the stress response. Discussion: Results tend to provide a more complex and resiliency-oriented representation of psychological distress compared to previous cross-sectional studies, but are in line with stress response studies. Findings allow us to better describe the profiles of distress response in STD and LTD groups. Participants that manifest short term distress experience acute stress reaction in which the interplay between personal, family and professional life events is associated with the stress response. Conversely, longer term distress response in HCWs presents a more complex mental health condition with an higher level of impairment and support needs compared to participants with short-term distress.
ABSTRACT
Background and objective: When implementing SARS-CoV2 testing concepts in healthcare facilities, different laws and regulations of equal rank apply. In the light of experienced impediments in translating legal requirements appropriately into legally secure concepts on an operational level, the objective of this paper was to develop corresponding specific recommendations for action. Methods: On the basis of guiding questions on previously identified fields of action, a focus group consisting of representatives of administration, different medical disciplines, and special interest groups discussed critical aspects of implementation using a holistic approach. The transcribed contents were analyzed through inductive development and deductive application of categories. Results: All contents of discussion could be matched with the identified categories legal backgrounds, requirements and objectives of testing concepts in healthcare facilities, responsibilities for implementing in operational decision-making chains, and implementing SARS-CoV2 testing concepts. Implications: The correct implementation of the legal requirements into legally compliant SARS-CoV2 testing concepts in healthcare facilities previously required the involvement of ministries, representatives of different medical disciplines and professional associations, employer and employee representatives and data privacy experts as well as representatives of possible cost bearers. In addition, an integrative and enforceable composition of laws and regulations is necessary. Defining objectives for testing concepts is significant for the following operational process flows that need to consider aspects of employee data privacy as well as providing additional personnel for fulfilling the tasks. Also, in future one central issue of healthcare facilities concerns the finding of solutions for IT interfaces for information transfer to employees in accordance with data privacy.
ABSTRACT
Background: During the pandemic of COVID-19, Healthcare Workers (HCWs) have been at the forefront of infection;they could also carry the disease to the others. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, HCWs in five hospitals of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences were included from 20 March to 21 July, 2020. HCWs were divided into two categories of frontline and second-line. The checklist was researcher-made and was on the basis of WHO risk factors regarding COVID-19, MERS and SARS. The participants were analyzed. The participants were asked, via phone call, to answer questions in 3 sections of demographics, probable risk factors, and clinical manifestations. The need for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and its availability were also evaluated. Results: From among 534 HCWs included in this study, 197(57.6%) were females;most of them were nurses, and the mean +/- SD age was 36.02 +/- 8.5 years. Eighteen HCWs were hospitalized due to the severity of disease, most of whom were front-line HCWs. Malaise (78.7%), fever (68.1%) and gastrointestinal symptoms (63.7%) were the most common manifestations in the participants. Smoking (OR=0.078, P=0.001) and underlying diseases (OR=2.19, P=0.025) were known as the factors predicting HCWs hospitalization. Being smoker and participating in intubation procedure were independent predictors of hospitalization in HCWs. Conclusion: Frontline HCWs had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 infection, as compared to the second-line group. Although adequate supplies of PPE are necessary, they do not completely mitigate high-risk exposures.
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus remains an important public health issue both nationally and globally, so all healthcare professionals including nurses should have a good knowledge and attitudes for educating their patients about Coronavirus and provide appropriate referral and support mechanisms to minimize the complication of disease [1]. COVID-19 is an emerging, rapidly changing global health challenge affecting all sectors [2, 3]. The Health Care Workers (i.e. HCWs) are not only at the forefront of the fight against this highly infectious disease but are also directly or indirectly affected by it and the likelihood of acquiring this disease is higher among HCWs compared to the general population [4]. Therefore, it is importance that HCWs across the world have adequate knowledge and good attitudes about all aspects of the disease from clinical manifestation, diagnosis, proposed treatment and established prevention strategies. In this manuscript, a descriptive design study was conducted from 1st April to June 2021. The study samples consisting of 90 nurses were purposively selected in three hospitals (Al-Khansa Teaching Hospital, Ibn Sina Teaching Hospital, and Telafer General Hospital) in Mosul city The objectives of this study are to assess the knowledge and attitudes of nurses about the Covid19 using the multi attribute decision making technique where the data have been adapted and reconstructed to be as triangular single-valued neutrosophic numbers (TSVNN) and tackled these (TSVNN) into the neutrosophic structured element (NSE). It is well known that the neutrosophic theory has flexible tools to analyze data utilized in dozens of fields of science such as but not limited to medicine, engineering, economics, healthcare, physics…etc. In this manuscript, the authors were very felicitous to choose an uncertain mathematical environment named neutrosophic theory to use it as a strong method in decision making technique to measure the performance of the nurses and their attitude in three Iraqi hospitals during a specific period of time where Covid19 has spread and was in its peak. The decision-making with multi-attribute criteria containing truth membership, indeterminate membership, and falsity membership is regarded as the core of the neutrosophic decisions. The neutrosophic theory used to handle uncertain, vague, incomplete, and inconsistent data or information which already exist in our daily life © 2023,Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. All Rights Reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: It remains unclear how fear of COVID-19 and resilience are related to psychological distress based on occupations among healthcare workers (HCWs) in hospitals treating patients with COVID-19. We conducted a survey on the mental health of HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic to determine the relationship between factors such as fear of COVID-19 and resilience as well as mental distress in each occupation of HCWs. Methods: We conducted a web-based survey among HCWs at seven hospitals treating COVID-19 patients in Japan from December 24, 2020 to March 31, 2021. A total of 634 participants were analyzed, and information regarding their socio-demographic characteristics and employment status was collected. Several psychometric measures were used, including the Kessler's Psychological Distress Scale (K6), the fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), and the Resilience Scale (RS14). Factors related to psychological distress were identified by logistic regression analysis. The association between job title and psychological scales was examined by one-way ANOVA, and t-tests were conducted to examine the association between the FCV-19S and hospital initiatives. Results: It was found that nurses and clerical workers were associated with psychological distress without considering FCV-19S or RS14; in a model that included FCV-19S, FCV-19S was associated with psychological distress, but job title was not; when RS14 was considered, resilience was protective. In terms of occupation, FCV-19S was lower among physicians and higher among nurses and clerical workers, while RS14 was higher among physicians and lower among other occupations. Having access to in-hospital consultation regarding infection control as well as to psychological and emotional support was associated with lower FCV-19S. Conclusion: Based on our findings, we can conclude that the level of mental distress differed by occupation and the differences in the fear of COVID-19 and resilience were important factors. In order to provide mental healthcare for HCWs during a pandemic, it is important to create consultation services that enable employees to discuss their concerns. In addition, it is important to take steps to strengthen the resilience of HCWs in preparation for future disasters.
ABSTRACT
During the COVID-19 outbreak, many healthcare workers (HCWs) have been infected because they failed to comply with the correct process of donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE). Based on this, we develop a gesture-controlled system that not only can train HCWs but also can give HCWs real-time guidance during the process of donning and doffing PPE. It can effectively prevent the infection of HCWs. We first use the hand detection algorithm to locate the position of the HCWs, helping them to enter the proper area. Then they can use our gesture recognition algorithm to control the playback of the videos which guides them in donning and doffing PPE. We verify the effectiveness of the system through a series of experiments. The results show the great value of our system in the protection of HCWs. © 2022 IEEE.
ABSTRACT
Given their occupational risk profile, HCWs were the first to receive anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. However, breakthrough infections remained common, mainly sustained by new SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) that rapidly spread one after another in Italy. Evidence suggests that the measured level of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies does not clearly predict the level of protection conferred by either natural infection or vaccine-induced immunization, highlighting the need for further study on the diversity in susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The present study aimed to characterize different risk profiles for SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs who had recently received the booster dose, and who were classified according to their immunization profile. The very small number of workers infected during the 8 months following the primary-cycle administration represents proof of the vaccine's effectiveness against non-omicron strains. The comparison among different immunization profiles showed that hybrid immunization (vaccine plus natural infection) elicits higher antibody levels. However, hybrid immunization does not always provide better protection against reinfection, thus suggesting that the immunization profile plays a major role as a virus-host interaction modifier. Despite the high resistance to the reinfection, the peri-booster infection had a not-neglectable infection rate (5.6%), this further reinforcing the importance of preventive measures.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic is a global health crisis, which has created an additional burden on the healthcare system and has caused enormous stress and emotional burnout among healthcare workers (HCWs). The purpose of the study is to investigate the phenomena of emotional burnout and the professional deformation of HCWs. The emotional burnout phenomenon of the HCWs was studied using the Maslach Burnout Inventory–Human Services Survey. In addition, the Professional Deformation Survey, based on scientific literature and research works, was developed. The survey consisted of 4 subscales distinguishing: aggression, authoritarianism, demonstrativeness, and conservatism. The survey results showed a high level of emotional exhaustion, a medium level of depersonalization, and a low level of personal achievement reduction. The Professional Deformation Survey showed good reliability for the whole sample in all four subscales. Results of the professional deformation study revealed that 29% of respondents manifest aggression while performing their professional activities. Authoritarianism can be observed in 18% of respondents, demonstrativeness in—31%, and professional deformation manifested as conservatism in—22% of HCWs. Data obtained on burnout and the professional deformation of the HCWs proves that the healthcare system and health organizations have reason to be concerned about the mental well-being of HCWs and the quality of healthcare service provision. © 2023 by the authors.
ABSTRACT
Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the pattern of medical services changed to minimize transmission to health care workers (HCWs) or hospitalized patients. Despite the care of COVID-19 patients in a special ward, new cases are accidentally discovered. This study aimed at determining the antibody seroprevalence among asymptomatic HCWs and the associated risks. Methods: The study involved 190 participants, including physicians, nurses, technicians, and administrative staff. All were inquired for sociodemographic, specialty, previous isolation, and previous infection, and their blood was tested for SARS-CoV2 antibody. Results: Of 190 HCWs;72,1% were females, the mean age was 32.6±7.9 years, 10.5% were smokers, and 15.8% reported co-morbid illness. SARS CoV2 antibodies were found in 68 (35.8%);being IgG, IgM and both IgM and IgG in 47 (69.1%), 10 (14.7%) and 11 (16.2%) participants respectively. The prevalence was higher (47.6%) among HCWs of the COVID unit, [OR=1.7 (95% CI: 0.69-4.3)] and HCWs with previous COVID-19, OR:1.61 (95% CI:0.88-2.94). The prevalence was significantly lower among smokers (p=0.049), OR:0.29 (95% CI:0.08-1.01), and significantly higher in HCWs who recalled cough (p=0.036) OR: 1.97 (95% CI: 1.05-3.69). The likelihood of antibody seropositivity increased in technicians [OR:2.02 (95% CI: 0.92-4.44)], followed by physicians [OR:1.7 (95% CI: 0.7-4.33)] while the odds ratio was low among nurses [OR:0.58 (95% CI: 0.32-1.07). Conclusion: A considerable proportion of antibody positive HCWs had evidence of past SARS CoV2. Provision of adequate personal protective equipment and periodic screening of HCWs are urgently needed to lessen the transmission within the health care settings. © 2020 The author (s).
ABSTRACT
The emergence of novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China during late 2019 spread quickly and creating international emergency and tremendous challenges for healthcare workers (HCWs) including dental and oral healthcare professionals. The brisk spread of this new viral disease forced HCWs to suffer from different types of stress including mortality and morbidity, delayed patient dealing, scarcity of complete personal protective equipment (PPE), and fear of being COVID-19 virus target and carriers to their family members. The dental and oral HCWs were also advised to apply mobility restrictions and social distancing measures. All of a sudden, most of the regular medical check-ups including dental clinic appointments were cancelled, reducing the number of patients flow. The abrupt cancellation of appointments put a sudden break on medical profession including dental practice. Different scales like progression of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), Chinese Health Questionnaire-12 (CHd-12), Davidson Trauma Scale-Chinese (DTS-C), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), Impact of Event Scale (IES), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) etc. have been devised in different countries to assess the overall mental health status. The reports from earlier SARS outbreak in 2007 had also put a psychological impact on HCWs but least has been learned from this out break. The reports from previous Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreaks and early COVID-19 pandemic have a considerable negative impact (short and long-term) on mental status of HCWs. Different types of negative impacts on mental health like depression, anxiety, sleep disorders and distress were reported in HCWs during COVID-19 pandemic. The current COVID-19 pandemic given a broader understanding of how much, how far and how fast an outbreak can occur and affect HCWs psychologically. In this review, authors summarize the impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the psychology of HCWs, as reported from different countries.Copyright © 2022, Anka Publishers. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: The COVID-19 Pandemic had a significant negative impact on the mental health of healthcare workers (HCWs). Evidence-based interventions that could be used to mitigate this impact are lacking in the literature. This review aims to evaluate psychological interventions used for employees following previous disasters and assess the transferability of these interventions to a healthcare setting during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Intervention information from a previously published systematic review of the literature published up to 2015 was extracted, and an additional search of studies published from 2015–2020 was conducted. Studies were assessed for transferability using a checklist derived from the PIET-T process model. Results: Interventions from eighteen studies were assessed for transferability (including three studies identified in an updated literature search). Interventions established as most transferable included resilience training, meditation/mindfulness interventions, and cognitive behavioural therapy. Psychological debriefing was transferable but as it is contrary to current recommendations is not deemed appropriate for adoption. Conclusions: Several existing interventions have the potential to be utilised within the COVID-19 context/ pandemic. More research needs to be undertaken in this area to assess these interventions upon transfer. © Journal of Public Health and Emergency. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 is currently threatening the globe. SARS-CoV-2 is the cause of COVID-19, which spreads via droplets/airborne and direct contact. Health care workers (HCWs) are the front-line workers, which are directly involved in taking care of patients affected by COVID-19. HCWs are at a higher risk of infection during the caring of COVID-19 patients. This focused review high-lighted the higher risk for COVID-19 infection among health care professionals during close contact with patients and their preventive management in COVID-19 pandemic.Copyright © 2021 Bentham Science Publishers.
ABSTRACT
Background: Influenza vaccine uptake in most European countries remains low, despite the World Health Organization's target of 75%. Community pharmacists play a vital role in promoting vaccination; however, they have been reported to be vaccine-hesitant. This study aimed to investigate changes in pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as their COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Methods: In December 2020, all members of the Swiss Association of Pharmacists were invited to participate in an online, cross-sectional survey. This study assessed pharmacists' attitudes toward influenza vaccination by surveying influenza vaccine uptake during the 2019-20 influenza season and possible reasons for their decision(s), in addition to their intention to receive COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccination(s) during the 2020-21 influenza season. Descriptive analysis and multinomial logistic regression were used to assess predictors of vaccine uptake and intention. Results: Of 5900 Swiss pharmacists, 569 (9.6%) completed the survey. The self-reported influenza vaccination coverage among pharmacists during the 2019-20 season was 48.0%. The primary reason for vaccine uptake was the belief that all healthcare workers should be vaccinated, whereas the main reason for refusal was a lack of concern about contracting influenza. The proportions of participants who intend to accept influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations in the 2020-2021 season, when available, were 63.3% and 66.5%, respectively. The most important predictor of high willingness to be vaccinated against influenza in 2020-21 was vaccination history (OR = 3.73; 95% CI = 1.47-9.50), while the most critical predictor of willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19 was the intention to be vaccinated against influenza (OR = 3.45; 95% CI = 1.74-6.84). Conclusions: Findings indicated that although pharmacists' readiness to accept seasonal influenza vaccination significantly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza vaccine uptake among them remains suboptimal. This is consistent with what has been reported in the literature.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at higher risk of getting infected with COVID-19 infection due to their close proximity to COVID-19-positive patients. We studied the risk stratification and positivity rate in HCWs at risk of getting COVID-19 infection as well as the possible factors responsible for their being at risk of COVID-19 infection during the study period. Material and Methods: This prospective study was conducted after approval by the institutional ethics committee. The data regarding demographic variables, risk stratification, COVID-19 (reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction) report, and possible sources of exposure for HCWs were recorded in a proforma by personal/telephonic interviews as well as from hospital records from March 2020 to June 2021. The data generated were entered into Microsoft Excel® software and analyzed using percentages, proportions, and Chi-square tests for qualitative variables. Results: COVID-19 infection's positivity rate was 19.5% among high-risk and 0.6% among low-risk HCW contacts. HCWs working in non-COVID-19 areas (67.9%) were more at risk than those working in COVID-19 areas (32.1%). In contrast, the COVID-19 positivity rate was significantly higher among high-risk contact HCWs from COVID-19 areas (34.2%) than in non-COVID-19 areas (12.6%). The maximum COVID-19 positivity rate was seen in high-risk contacts with body fluid exposure (21%), performing aerosol-generating procedures (20%), and close exposure in operation theaters (18%). Conclusions: Risk stratification is an important tool to contain infection among HCWs who had unprotected close contact with a COVID-19-positive case. With appropriate contact tracing, we were able to avoid over- and under-quarantine, save many man-hours as well as contain the spread of infection. HCWs should not only wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) during work hours but should also practice mask-wearing and social distancing while they are in the community.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the severity of symptoms, duration of infection and viral loads of health-care workers (HCWs) who tested positive for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during Omicron's prevalence, in regard to vaccination and previous infection. METHODS: During 2 weeks of highest rate of COVID-19 cases in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the positive nasopharyngeal swabs were analysed in 141 HCWs by reverse transcription quantitative PCR, targeting four different genes: RdRp, E, N and nsp14. Uniformed questionnaire was used to collect relevant sociodemographic and epidemiological data from HCWs divided into four groups: unvaccinated/not previously infected (group 1); unvaccinated/previously infected (group 2); vaccinated/not previously infected (group 3); and vaccinated/previously infected (group 4). RESULTS: We observed that occurrence of fever and smell or taste loss were more frequent in group 1 (86.4% and 25%) and group 3 (76.9% and 19.2%), in comparison to group 2 (64.4% and 6.7%) and group 4 (69.2% and 3.8%), (p = 0.023 and p = 0.003). Although statistically not significant, group 2 (61.9%), group 3 (65.4%), and group 4 (70.8%) experienced negativization within 7 days of positive RT-qPCR test, whereas 51.2% of HCWs from group 1 tested negative later on. There is no significant difference between all four groups regarding Ct values of analysed genes. CONCLUSION: During Omicron's prevalence, the vaccination had less substantial effect on symptomatic disease among HCWs, while fever and loss of smell or taste were considerably less likely to occur upon reinfection. Since viral loads and negativization periods do not seem to significantly vary, irrespective of pre-existing immunity, systemic vaccination and mask-wearing should still be considered among HCWs.
ABSTRACT
Background and Aims: N95 mask being an essential element of personal protective equipment to be worn by health-care workers (HCWs) may lead to adverse effects and physiological stress as HCWs have to wear it for prolonged hours. Therefore, we planned to conduct a study in our intensive care unit staff to look for the effects of N95 masks on their health as well as to plan recommendations to ease them. Material and Methods: We conducted this study on our intensive care unit nursing staff and HCWs. We noted their oxygen saturation and heart rate at baseline as well as after 1 h, 2 h, 3 h, and 6 h of duty along with their subjective sensations. Institutional ethical clearance for the same was taken. Collected data were entered in MS Excel database and analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. Fisher's Z test was applied for comparing proportion and analysis of variance for comparing two means. Results: One hundred and nine HCWs participated in this, out of which 93 (85.3%) were females and 16 (14.7%) were males. Eighty-four (77.1%) participants were below 40 years. Twenty-three participants (21.1%) were overweight and 37 (33.9%) were obese. There was no significant drop in saturation and rise in heart rate during these hours. Conclusions: On comparing subjective sensations of HCWs, our study found that feeling of uneasiness was found more in less than 40 years age group as compared to more than 40 years. N95 masks were found to have no impact on cardiovascular system and do not lead to hypoxia while working routinely even for prolonged hours.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 reduces the risk of hospitalisation and death, but vaccine-induced IgG antibodies against the spike protein (IgG S) decline over time. Less is known about the nature of the vaccine-induced T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 antigens. METHODS: IgG antibodies against nucleocapsid protein (IgG N), IgG S, and T-cell response towards SARS-CoV-2 antigens were determined in samples taken between November 2020 and November 2021 from a cohort of healthcare workers at an Infectious Diseases Department. RT-PCR screening for SARS-CoV-2 was encouraged once every four weeks in addition to testing when symptomatic or identified through contact tracing. Vaccination data were collected at the end of the study. RESULTS: At inclusion, T-cell response to SARS-CoV-2 antigens was found in 10/15 (66.7%) of participants with a previous/current COVID-19 infection and in 9/54 (16.7%) of participants with no prior/current history of COVID-19 infection. All participants with complete follow-up (n = 59) received two doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine during the study. All participants demonstrated detectable IgG (S) antibodies at the end of the study, in median 278 days (IQR 112) after the second vaccine dose. All but four participants displayed T-cell responses towards SARS-CoV-2 antigens. IgG S antibody levels correlated with time since the second vaccine dose. In addition, previous COVID-19 infection and the strength of the S1 T-cell response correlated with IgG S antibody levels. However, no correlation was demonstrated between the strength of the T-cell response and time since the second vaccine dose. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination induces robust T-cell responses that remain for at least nine months.
ABSTRACT
Background: Vaccine acceptance can play a pivotal role towards control of COVID-19. Many healthcare workers (HCWs) have articulated safety and effectiveness concerns despite being the frontline takers of vaccination. This survey was aimed to investigate the causes of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and distrust among HCWs of Pakistani origin. Methodology: This internet-based survey was conducted on 138 HCWs of Pakistani origin from January 2021 to April 2021. Result(s): Out of a total of 138 subjects, 137 (99.3%) HCWs responded to the survey. COVID-19 vaccinations had already been administered to 101 (74%) of the respondents. Out of 36 (26.2%) unvaccinated individuals, 19 (14%) completely declined the vaccination. The prevalence of participants who distrust vaccination effectiveness and safety was 110 (80.3%), while 94 (68.6%) believed vaccine safety was compromised due to rapid development. The prevalence of HCWs who believed long-term adverse effects and that the manufacturers falsified the data was 36 (26.3%) and 22 (16%) respectively. Conclusion(s): Our survey found that fears and concerns about the efficacy of the vaccine can impasse struggles to disease transmission and vaccine distribution. Healthcare workers in Pakistan had a higher prevalence of vaccine acceptance compared to other surveys. Copyright © 2022 Faculty of Anaesthesia, Pain and Intensive Care, AFMS. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is evolving,the newly emerged Omicron variant being the dominant strain worldwide, and this has raised concerns about vaccine efficacy. The purposes of this survey were to examine the extent to which healthcare workers (HCWs) intend to receive a second booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and the factors that influence their willingness to accept it. Methods: The study was conducted among HCWs who were randomly selected from four public hospitals in the Campania region, Southern Italy. Results: A total of 496 HCWs answered the questionnaire (a response rate of 61.2%). Among the respondents, 20.8% indicated a score of 10, using a 10-point Likert-type scale, regarding the usefulness of a second COVID-19 vaccine booster dose. Physicians, HCWs who believed that COVID-19 was a severe disease, and those who have acquired information about the second booster dose from scientific journals were more likely to have this positive attitude. Slightly more than half of HCWs self-reported willingness to receive a second booster dose. Respondents who believe that HCWs are at higher risk of being infected by SARS-CoV-2, those who have a higher belief that COVID-19 is a severe disease, and those who have a higher belief that a second booster dose is useful were more willing to receive a second booster dose. The main reasons for those who had a positive intention were to protect their family members and patients, whereas, the main reasons for not getting vaccinated or for uncertainty were that the dose does not offer protection against the emerging variants and the fear of its side effects. HCWs of younger age, physicians, those who have a higher belief that a second booster dose is useful, and those who were willing to receive a second booster dose were more likely to recommend the booster dose to their patients. Conclusion: This study's findings highlight the necessity for designing and implementing educational interventions for improving second booster dose uptake and beliefs among HCWs and their capacity to recommend the vaccine to the patients.