Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 983
Filter
1.
Br J Gen Pract ; 72(715): 56-57, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2201009
2.
Curr HIV/AIDS Rep ; 19(5): 328-343, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2174984

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The discovery of vaccines significantly reduced morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases and led to the elimination and eradication of some. Development of safe and effective vaccines is a critical step to the control of infectious diseases; however, there is the need to address vaccine hesitancy because of its potential impact on vaccine uptake. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review of studies on interventions to address measles and human papillomavirus vaccine hesitancy. We discussed how lessons learned from these studies could be applied towards COVID-19 and future human immunodeficiency virus vaccines. RESULTS: We found that there are several successful approaches to improving vaccine acceptance. Interventions should be context specific and build on the challenges highlighted in various settings. CONCLUSION: Strategies could be used alone or in combination with others. The most successful interventions directly targeted the population for vaccination. Use of financial incentives could be a potential tool to improve vaccine uptake.


Subject(s)
AIDS Vaccines , COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Measles , Papillomavirus Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Humans , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Vaccination Hesitancy
4.
Rural Remote Health ; 22(3): 7140, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2146088

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine hesitancy has been a major barrier to mitigating the effects of COVID-19, especially in rural Oregon, USA. This study assessed the influence of political affiliation, religious identity, and rurality on vaccine hesitancy in counties across Oregon. METHODS: Cross-sectional association analysis was performed using public data on US President Trump votership in the 2020 election, White Christian identity, population density, and COVID-19 vaccination data for adults as of 29 August 2021. RESULTS: By 29 August 2021, 68.0% of adults had been fully vaccinated in Oregon. Trump votership was the strongest independent association with vaccination status in Oregon (r=0.90, p<0.01), followed by White Christian identity (r= -0.69, p<0.01), and population density (r=0.55, p<0.01). In multivariate analysis, White Christian identity and political affiliation with Trump in the 2020 election explained 84.1% of the variability in COVID-19 vaccination status in Oregon counties. CONCLUSION: White Christian identity, Trump affiliation, and rurality were identified as factors in vaccine hesitancy among counties in Oregon. Without addressing these factors in public health outreach, vaccine hesitancy is likely to continue unabated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Oregon , Parents , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Politics , Religion , Vaccination , Vaccination Hesitancy
5.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(12)2022 06 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2142774

ABSTRACT

Much of the differences in health care outcomes can be attributed to the differential rates of primary health care utilization and resource allocation across population subgroups [...].


Subject(s)
Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Rural Population , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Primary Health Care , Urban Population
6.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 22(1): 1403, 2022 Nov 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139272

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Women undergoing treatment for breast cancer require frequent clinic visits for maintenance of therapy. With COVID-19 causing health care disruptions, it is important to learn about how this population's access to health care has changed. This study compares self-reported health care utilization and changes in factors related to health care access among women treated at a cancer center in the mid-South US before and during the pandemic. METHODS: Participants (N = 306) part of a longitudinal study to improve adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) adherence completed pre-intervention baseline surveys about their health care utilization prior to AET initiation. Questions about the impact of COVID-19 were added after the pandemic started assessing financial loss and factors related to care. Participants were categorized into three time periods based on the survey completion date: (1) pre-COVID (December 2018 to March 2020), (2) early COVID (April 2020 - December 2020), and later COVID (January 2021 to June 2021). Negative binomial regression analyses used to compare health care utilization at different phases of the pandemic controlling for patient characteristics. RESULTS: Adjusted analyses indicated office visits declined from pre-COVID, with an adjusted average of 17.7 visits, to 12.1 visits during the early COVID period (p = 0.01) and 9.9 visits during the later COVID period (p < 0.01). Hospitalizations declined from an adjusted average 0.45 admissions during early COVID to 0.21 during later COVID, after vaccines became available (p = 0.05). Among COVID period participants, the proportion reporting changes/gaps in health insurance coverage increased from 9.5% participants during early-COVID to 14.8% in the later-COVID period (p = 0.05). The proportion reporting financial loss due to the pandemic was similar during both COVID periods (34.3% early- and 37.7% later-COVID, p = 0.72). The proportion of participants reporting delaying care or refilling prescriptions decreased from 15.2% in early-COVID to 4.9% in the later-COVID period (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 caused disruptions to routine health care for women with breast cancer. Patients reported having fewer office visits at the start of the pandemic that continued to decrease even after vaccines were available. Fewer patients reported delaying in-person care as the pandemic progressed.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Humans , Female , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Longitudinal Studies , beta-Aminoethyl Isothiourea , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Health Services Accessibility , Ambulatory Care Facilities
7.
BMJ Open ; 12(11): e066615, 2022 11 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2137792

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify, describe and map the research tools used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: In March 2022, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Source Nursing, Africa Wide and APA PsychInfo for peer-reviewed literature in English related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, refusal, acceptance and access in SSA. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews to guide evidence gathering and as a template to present the evidence retrieval process. RESULTS: In the studies selected for review (n=72), several measurement tools were used to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and refusal. These measurements were willingness and intent to vaccinate from the perspectives of the general population, special population groups such as mothers, students and staff in academic institutions and healthcare workers and uptake as a proxy for measuring assumed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Measurements of access to COVID-19 vaccination were cost and affordability, convenience, distance and time to travel or time waiting for a vaccine and (dis)comfort. Although all studies measured COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, acceptance and refusal, relatively few studies (n=16, 22.2%) included explicit measurements of access to COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the gaps identified in the scoping review, we propose that future research on determinants of COVID-19 vaccination in SSA should further prioritise the inclusion of access-related variables. We recommend the development and use of standardised research tools that can operationalise, measure and disentangle the complex determinants of vaccine uptake in future studies throughout SSA and other low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Africa South of the Sahara/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Vaccination Hesitancy
9.
PLoS One ; 17(11): e0277016, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119322

ABSTRACT

Social capital (SC) has been documented to effectively reduce the spread of diseases, including COVID-19; however, research pertaining to SC and COVID-19 vaccination in Korea is lacking. This cross-sectional study conducted in the city of Wonju, Gangwon Province, Korea (n = 1,096) examined the differences in COVID-19 vaccine trust and hesitancy considering individual characteristics and investigated the effects of SC on COVID-19 vaccine trust and hesitancy. SC was measured based on 14 items pertaining to social trust, network, and norms. Responses regarding COVID-19 screening history, vaccine trust, and vaccine hesitancy were also assessed. SC scores did not differ between sexes, but differed significantly according to age and household income; thus, adults aged 70-79 years had the highest SC scores, and mean SC score increased significantly with income. COVID-19 vaccine trust differed significantly according to age, average household income, social organization involvement, and SC score. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy differed significantly with age, SC score, and COVID-19 screening history. In univariate logistic regression, age, average household income, social organization involvement, and SC score were significant predictors of vaccine trust; in multivariable analysis, however, the identified predictors were age and SC. In particular, people with an SC score ≥50 were 2.660 times more likely to trust COVID-19 vaccines than those with lower scores. In multivariable analysis, age and SC were significant predictors of vaccine hesitancy. In particular, people with an SC score ≥50 were 1.400 times more likely not to be hesitant about receiving COVID-19 vaccines than people with lower scores. These results indicate that prioritizing policies to increase SC and trust in the government could boost the COVID-19 vaccination rate.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Adult , COVID-19 Vaccines , Trust , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Parents , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Vaccination , Republic of Korea/epidemiology
10.
PLoS One ; 17(11): e0277493, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2119283

ABSTRACT

Vaccine hesitancy is proving to be a significant impediment to COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in some developing countries. This study focuses on vaccine hesitancy and means of reducing it. Data come from a large, representative phone survey and online randomized survey experiment, both run in Papua New Guinea, a developing country with low vaccination rates. Less than 20% of relevant respondents to the phone survey were willing to be vaccinated, primarily because of fear of side effects and low trust in the vaccine. Although vaccine hesitancy was high in the online experiment, participants who received a message emphasizing that the vaccine was safe and COVID-19 dangerous were 68% more likely to state they planned to be vaccinated than those in the control group. A message appealing to social norms was also effective in reducing vaccine hesitancy, although its efficacy was limited to certain types of people.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Developing Countries , Vaccination Hesitancy , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Surveys and Questionnaires
12.
Clin Appl Thromb Hemost ; 28: 10760296221137848, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117653

ABSTRACT

The aim was to describe inpatients with COVID-19 empirically prescribed heparinoid anticoagulants and compare resource utilization between prophylactic/low-dose and therapeutic/high-dose groups. Methods: This retrospective observational study used real-world data from 880 US hospitals in the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database during 4/1/2020-11/30/2020. Descriptive analysis was used to characterize patients. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, length of stay (LOS), mortality, and costs by anticoagulation dose group, adjusting for cohort characteristics. Among 122,508 inpatients, 29,225 (23.9%) received therapeutic/high-dose, and 93,283 (76.1%) received prophylactic/low-dose anticoagulation. The high-dose group had more comorbidities and worse laboratory values compared with low-dose. Respectively, ICU admission rates were 36.7% and 19.1% and LOS median (Q1, Q3) was 8 (5, 15) and 5 (3, 9) days. In separate adjusted models, high-dose anticoagulation was associated with a 45% increase in odds of ICU admission, 26% increase in odds of in-hospital mortality, 21% longer average LOS, and 28% greater average total cost compared with low-dose (each P < 0.001). Prophylactic/low-dose anticoagulation treatment was associated with decreased healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heparinoids , Humans , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , Hospitalization , Intensive Care Units , Retrospective Studies , Patient Acceptance of Health Care
13.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci ; 26(21): 8188-8196, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117100

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impose a health and economic burden on the global population with millions of deaths linked to infection with the virus. Vaccination remains the most effective intervention to reduce infection, severity, and hospitalization for COVID-19. However, vaccine hesitancy has emerged as a global phenomenon facing the effective implementation of coronavirus vaccination programs. Several studies have been conducted in Jordan to examine vaccine acceptability. This study aims at calculating the pooled acceptance rate for the COVID-19 vaccine in Jordan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline was adopted to conduct the present meta-analysis. The RevMan software was utilized to estimate the poled acceptance rate and to construct the study Figures. RESULTS: Data from 22 studies that fit the study inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. The total number of participants was 38,600. The pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate was estimated to be 39.89% [95%-CI: 33.52-46.27]. Subgroup analysis, according to the year of publication, showed a pooled COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate of 36.70% [95%-CI: 29.27-44.12, I2=100%, p<0.0001) for 2021, and 48.90% [95%-CI: 40.21-57.65, I2=91.0%, p<0.0001) for 2022. This indicates about a 33% increase in vaccine acceptance through 2022. CONCLUSIONS: The reported COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate in Jordan is below expectations. While the acceptance rate has increased in 2022 compared to 2021, there is still a need for more efforts and awareness interventions to reach a convincing level of vaccination against COVID-19 in Jordan.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics , Jordan/epidemiology , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
14.
Curr Opin Organ Transplant ; 27(4): 277-284, 2022 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117084

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this study was to summarize new data and perspectives in pretransplant vaccination, with a particular focus on COVID-19 vaccination and vaccination requirements. RECENT FINDINGS: Pretransplant vaccination produces superior markers of immunity and is expected to have greater clinical benefit, compared with posttransplant vaccination. As such, efforts are underway to identify and characterize barriers to pretransplant vaccination, with a particular focus on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Unfortunately, vaccine hesitancy is common in transplant patients, often motivated by individual side effect and safety concerns. COVID-19 vaccination requirements have been implemented in some centres, informed by ethical principles, including beneficence, utility and justice. SUMMARY: Barriers to pretransplant vaccination can be understood in three categories: hard stops, including issues of vaccine availability, eligibility, safety and feasibility; soft stops, including issues of convenience, prioritization and care coordination; and volitional stops related to vaccine hesitancy and refusal. All of these barriers present opportunities for improvement based on recent data.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , COVID-19/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Vaccination
15.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(22)2022 Nov 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2110067

ABSTRACT

This study focuses on factors that shape vaccine attitudes and behaviours in the context of a low-trust society. Our analysis focuses on the Polish vaccination programme against COVID-19, primarily on (1) the evaluation of the information campaign, (2) trust in the institutions, (3) trust in other people, (4) attitudes toward vaccine safety and efficacy, (5) attitudes toward restrictions related to vaccination (e.g., restricted access to certain services for unvaccinated persons) and the introduction of mandatory vaccination, (6) the evaluation of the government's actions during the pandemic, and (7) political preferences. The study was conducted with a sample of 1143 adult residents in Poland (CATI). The explanation of the factors determining the COVID-19 vaccine was based on structural equation modelling (SEM). The model showed that the declared fact of vaccination was largely determined by a positive attitude toward restrictions related to vaccination and trust in vaccines. The formation of the provaccine attitude was to an extent determined by the assessment of the government's campaign and actions during pandemic. While institutional trust had a positive effect on support for the ruling coalition (0.56), the latter on its own had the opposite effect (-0.61) on the formation of provaccine attitude. In the group who both trust institutions and support the parties currently in power, there are more of those who simultaneously reject the restrictions and mandatory vaccination and remain sceptical about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines than those who both trust in the vaccine safety and efficacy and accept the restrictions and mandatory vaccination. This indicates that in the context of strong political polarisation, ideological affiliations may play a greater role in shaping vaccine attitudes and behaviours than institutional trust.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , Humans , Trust , COVID-19 Vaccines , Poland , COVID-19/prevention & control , Latent Class Analysis , Vaccination , Patient Acceptance of Health Care
16.
J Health Care Poor Underserved ; 33(4): 2007-2031, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2109267

ABSTRACT

While vaccine hesitancy has been described for the general population, vaccine hesitancy among the chronically ill has not been well explored. This study assesses COVID­19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake among individuals with chronic illness using nationwide survey data. We analyzed vaccine hesitancy prior to and after approval of the vaccines using multinomial logistic regression and binomial logistic regression, respectively. In the first survey, 39% reported they were unlikely or unsure about receiving the vaccine. In adjusted analyses, female sex, Black race, anti­vaccination attitudes, media mistrust, and not following the media were associated with vaccine hesitancy. Despite this hesitance, in the follow­up survey, 89% reported vaccine receipt, with those more fearful of COVID­19, with more trust in the media, and closely following the development of the vaccine were most likely to move from hesitance to acceptance. Vaccine hesitancy is a mutable characteristic, underscoring the need for high-quality public health messaging.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , Female , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Vaccination Hesitancy , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Parents , Chronic Disease
17.
Vaccine ; 40(46): 6649-6657, 2022 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106118

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Vaccine hesitancy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health concern in the US. Cancer patients are especially vulnerable to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and require targeted prevention efforts against COVID-19. METHODS: We used longitudinal survey data from patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center to identify attitudes, beliefs, and sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among cancer patients. Patients with confirmed invasive cancer diagnosis through Cancer Registry data were asked about vaccine acceptance through the question "Now that a COVID-19 vaccine is available, are you likely to get it?" and dichotomized into high accepters (already received it, would get it when available) and low accepters (waiting for a doctor to recommend it, waiting until more people received it, not likely to get it). RESULTS: Most patients (86.8% of 5,814) were high accepters of the COVID-19 vaccine. High accepters had more confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine than low accepters. Multivariable logistic regression showed older individuals (70-89 vs.18-49: OR:2.57, 95% CI:1.33-4.86), those with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (very serious vs. not at all serious: OR:2.55, 95% CI:1.76-3.70), practicing more risk mitigation behaviors (per one standard deviation OR:1.75, 95% CI:1.57-1.95), and history of receiving the flu shot versus not (OR:6.56, 95% CI:5.25-8.20) had higher odds of vaccine acceptance. Individuals living with more than one other person (vs. alone: OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.79) and those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged (per 10 percentile points: OR: 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.85, 0.93) had lower odds of reporting vaccine acceptance. CONCLUSION: Most patients with cancer have or would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who are less likely to accept the vaccine have more concerns regarding effectiveness and side effects, are younger, more socioeconomically disadvantaged, and have lower perceptions of COVID-19 severity.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Cross-Sectional Studies , Vaccination
18.
J Adolesc Health ; 71(6): 673-678, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2105242

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The first vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) for adolescents 16 years and older in the United States received Emergency Use Authorization in December 2020. Soon after its approval, parents expressed concerns about vaccine safety for adolescents. Similar concerns about vaccine safety partially explain suboptimal human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake. This qualitative study explores similarities and differences in parents' attitudes about these two vaccines. METHODS: Parents were recruited through social media and at health centers in Alabama. Semi-structured interviews with parents of adolescents aged 9-17 years were conducted before and after Alabama expanded age eligibility to those 16 and older. Topics included knowledge about HPV and COVID-19 vaccines, and parents' intentions to have children vaccinated. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: From March 11, 2021 to April 24, 2021, 21 in-depth interviews were conducted. Parents discussed the importance of HPV and COVID-19 vaccines for protecting their children's health but differences between the two related to community protection. Parents were concerned about vaccine safety but media coverage about the COVID-19 vaccine led to more favorable attitudes about the benefits of vaccination, which was not observed for HPV vaccines. Instead for HPV vaccination, parents wanted their healthcare providers' opinions about the vaccine before making a vaccination decision. DISCUSSION: Parents had similar concerns about HPV and COVID-19 vaccines. Although provider recommendations can improve vaccine uptake, local news reports were seen to have a positive impact on COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in lieu of provider recommendation. Disseminating information online could be beneficial to promote HPV and COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Adolescent , Child , Humans , United States , COVID-19 Vaccines , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Parents , Vaccination , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
19.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(21)2022 Nov 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2099553

ABSTRACT

Starting in early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has been responsible, worldwide, for millions of deaths and patients with long-COVID syndrome. In an attempt to stop the spread of the virus, the blanket administration of COVID-19 vaccines proved to be the most effective measure, yet the existence and availability of functional vaccines did not and, still, do not ensure the willingness and intent of people to be vaccinated. This study assessed the similarities and differences in vaccine fears and vaccine hesitancy through between clusters of subjects: people that were not infected with COVID-19, people that had COVID but did not develop long-lasting symptoms, and people that were infected with COVID and developed long-COVID syndrome. From the sample of 1111 Italian people, it was found that individuals who experienced mild symptoms showed higher vaccine hesitancy (confidence, complacency, and collective responsibility) than those who did not contract COVID-19. People affected by long-COVID showed a lower overall hesitancy than individuals who had COVID-19 without incurring long-lasting symptoms and, thus, essentially resembled people who had no experience of COVID-19 infection in terms of the vaccine hesitancy scores. Vaccine fear remained unchanged across all three of the examined clusters.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Vaccination Hesitancy , Pandemics , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Vaccination , Fear , Syndrome
20.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(21)2022 Nov 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2099546

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acceptance of vaccination in both healthcare professionals and the general public in the community is vital for efficacious control of the virus. Vaccine acceptance associates with many factors. Little research has been dedicated to examining attitudes and behaviors of healthcare professionals and community stakeholders regarding COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in Hong Kong. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was sent between February and April 2021 (N = 512). Multivariable regression modeling was used to identify associated variables with outcomes using adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% of confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Two demographic variables-age group of over 40 years old (40-59: ORm = 3.157, 95% CI = 2.090-4.467; 60 or over: ORm = 6.606, 95% CI = 2.513-17.360) and those who had previously received a flu vaccination (ORm = 1.537, 95% CI = 1.047-2.258)-were found to be associated with high vaccine intent. Adjusting for these two variables, the results showed that five factors on knowledge variables as perceived benefits for vaccine intent were statistically significant: "Closed area and social gathering are the major ways of SAR-CoV-2 transmission" (AOR = 4.688, 95% CI = 1.802-12.199), "The vaccine can strengthen my immunity against COVID-19, so as to reduce the chance of being infected with it" (AOR = 2.983, 95% CI = 1.904-4.674), "The vaccine can lower the risk of transmitting the viruses to my family and friends" (AOR = 2.276, 95% CI = 1.508-3.436), "The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh its harm" (AOR = 3.913, 95% CI = 2.618-5.847) and "Vaccination is an effective way to prevent COVID-19" (AOR = 3.810, 95% CI = 2.535-5.728). CONCLUSIONS: High vaccine intent was associated with age and having previously received a flu vaccination. Knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals and community stakeholders were associated with high vaccine intent. Training and continuing education programs for healthcare providers and community stakeholders focusing on the delivery of evidence-based data on the benefits of vaccination campaigns for populations to increase the vaccination rates is recommended.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Humans , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Hong Kong , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Health Personnel
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL