Belarusian Healthcare Professionals' Views on Monkeypox and Vaccine Hesitancy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the low transmission risk of Monkeypox (mpox) in Belarus, this study is vital as it contributes to our understanding of vaccine hesitancy among healthcare professionals (HCPs). It aims to assess vaccination perceptions and evaluate the willingness to pay for the vaccine among Belarusian HCPs, thereby enhancing pandemic preparedness. METHODS: in October 2022, a cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted among Belarusian HCPs using a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ). Invitations were disseminated via social media platforms using a snowball sampling method. The SAQ encompassed various categories, including sociodemographic details, medical history, sources of mpox information, perceived and factual mpox knowledge, and perceptions of the mpox vaccine according to the health belief model (HBM), mpox vaccine acceptance and willingness to pay (WTP). RESULTS: while a large proportion of respondents had good knowledge of mpox epidemiology and its clinical manifestations, their awareness of available vaccines and treatment options was limited. Consequently, a significant correlation was found between the history of influenza vaccination and mpox-related knowledge. Furthermore, the study showed that just over half of the participants (51.4%) were willing to receive the mpox vaccine if offered for free, safely, and effectively, with their decision largely influenced by perceived benefits (Spearman's rho = 0.451) and cues to action (Spearman's rho = 0.349). However, a considerable degree of hesitancy (30.6%) and resistance (18.1%) towards the mpox vaccine was observed, underscoring the need for targeted interventions to address these issues. CONCLUSIONS: this study highlights a significant knowledge gap among Belarusian HCPs about mpox vaccines and treatments, despite a general awareness of the disease's epidemiology and symptoms, and it underscores the need for targeted interventions to enhance mpox knowledge and vaccine acceptance.

Physicians' experiences of intercultural differences in communication with Ukrainian refugees during the Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict.

The aim of the study was to identify and explore barriers to communication between refugees from Ukraine and physicians providing health care, the perspective of physicians was embraced. The focus of the work reflects on the arrival of many forced migrants from Ukraine in 2022. Further, it focuses on the pressure that the presence of migrants' places on the Czech healthcare system, especially in doctor-migrant patient communication. The objectives of this study are also motivated by existing international evidence that misunderstandings and poor-quality communication can lead to lower patient satisfaction and adherence, and consequently poorer healthcare outcomes. The research was carried out in the form of qualitative research, 16 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with physicians providing health care to Ukrainian refugees. Informants were selected using a purposive sampling method to obtain as diverse a sample as possible. The resulting data were analysed by applying thematic coding. The results showed that four main areas of intercultural barriers play a key role in the relationship between physicians and Ukrainian patients. These are: (1) language, (2) differences in healthcare systems, (3) different attitudes towards health and illness and (4) prejudice. The major source of misunderstanding was the difference between the Czech and Ukrainian healthcare systems, which leads to a different position of the patient in the healthcare system. The conclusions prove that intercultural barriers play a significant role in the provision of health care to Ukrainian refugees but can be addressed to a large extent. The current situation in Czechia and the increasing diversity in society call for the need to acquire intercultural competencies in undergraduate and continuing medical education. Similarly, the adoption of measures that promote culturally competent health care is needed.

Nuclear Anxiety Amid the Russian-Ukrainian War 2022 (RUW-22): Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study.

Nuclear anxiety, which refers to the fear of nuclear war and its consequences, is expected to increase amid the Russian-Ukrainian War of 2022 (RUW-22). This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of nuclear anxiety and its associated variables among university students in the Czech Republic during the first weeks of RUW-22. A cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out from March-April 2022, utilizing a digital self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) to collect data from the target population. The SAQ consisted of multiple-choice items inquiring about demographic characteristics; generalized anxiety symptoms using generalized anxiety disorder-7 (GAD-7); depressive symptoms using patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9); and attitudes towards civilian uses of nuclear power, and nuclear war-related anxiety. Of the 591 participating students, 67.7% were females, 68.2% were Czech nationals, and 61.8% followed the RUW-22 news at least once daily. The mean GAD-7 score of our participants was 7.86 ± 5.32 (0-21); and their mean PHQ-9 score was 8.66 ± 6.29 (0-27). Regarding the civilian uses of nuclear power, most participants agreed that nuclear power was safe (64.5%), denied being afraid that civilian use of nuclear power might deteriorate their health (79.7%), and thought that public acceptance was important for building new nuclear power plants (56.9%). About 42.1% and 45.5% of the participants reported feeling depressed at the possibility of nuclear war and agreed that the chances that there would be a nuclear war in their lifetime were very high, respectively. When asked about their preparedness measures during the previous four weeks, less than one quarter (23.9%) reported looking for recommendations for protection against nuclear accidents, and less than one-fifth (19.3%) were looking for the nearest bomb shelter. The depression about nuclear war possibility was positively and relatively strongly correlated with the level of "feeling concerned about the RUW-22" (rs = 0.401), and it was moderately correlated with GAD-7 (rs = 0.377) and PHQ-9 (rs = 0.274) scores and weakly correlated with RUW-2-related news-following frequency (rs = 0.196). Within the limitations of the present study, nuclear anxiety was common among Czech university students. Its associated factors may include but are not limited to the female gender; common psychological disorders such as generalized anxiety and depression; RUW-22-related news following-frequency; and the level of "feeling concerned".

Mental Health Burden of the Russian-Ukrainian War 2022 (RUW-22): Anxiety and Depression Levels among Young Adults in Central Europe.

Armed conflicts are public health emergencies that affect human lives at multiple levels. The mental health of adolescents and young adults is at high risk during crisis settings; therefore, this cross-sectional survey-based study aimed to evaluate anxiety and depressive symptoms among university students in the Czech Republic following the Russian-Ukrainian war of 2022 (RUW-22). The study used standardized screening instruments; the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) for anxiety and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) for depression. Of 591 students who participated in this study, 67.7% were females, 68.2% held Czech citizenship, and 63.8% were enrolled in medical or healthcare programs. The participants were highly concerned about the RUW-22 news, with a mean score of 7.17 ± 2.50 (0-10). While 34% and 40.7% of the participants in this study manifested moderate to severe levels of anxiety and depression, respectively, the mental health burden of the RUW-22 was confirmed by the positive correlation between "feeling concerned", GAD-7 (ρ = 0.454), and PHQ-9 (ρ = 0.326). Female gender, higher frequency of news following, and social media use were associated with higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms; thus, proposing them to be risk factors for psychological disorders following the RUW-22.

The Object-Based and Process-Based Regulation of Genome Editing.

The article explores whether the broader regulatory framework applicable to the member states of the EU contains suitable tools to react to the rapid advances in science, especially as to the question of germline editing technologies. From the perspective of EU member states, the regulatory framework is fragmented between norms of international law, secondary EU law and national legislation. The rules and their interpretation are strongly influenced by the concept of precaution, which reflects the concern that there is not enough knowledge to assess the impact of genome editing technology on individuals, society and future populations. However, the argument of precaution loses its strength with every new scientific discovery. The expanding knowledge in the field creates the need to replace regulation, which is based on the lack of knowledge (such as precautionary moratoriums) by the regulation that is based on the actual knowledge. The article reaches a conclusion that the EU framework for advanced treatments and medicinal products is in a state where it can, in principle, address the questions associated with the safety and efficacy of germline editing technologies. The EU framework is, however, not suitable to assess the moral and societal impacts of new technology, which should be left for member states.

COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance of Pregnant and Lactating Women (PLW) in Czechia: An Analytical Cross-Sectional Study.

Pregnant and lactating women (PLW) represent a particular population subset with increased susceptibility for COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, even though the evidence about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines was delayed due to their initial exclusion from development trials. This unclear situation could have led to increased COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy levels among PLW; therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of Czech PLW towards COVID-19 vaccines and the determinants of their attitudes. An analytical cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out in the University Hospital Brno (South Moravia, Czechia) between August and October 2021. The study utilised a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) adapted from previous instruments used for the same purpose. The SAQ included closed-ended items covering demographic characteristics, clinical and obstetric characteristics, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and potential psychosocial predictors of vaccine acceptance. Out of the 362 included participants, 278 were pregnant (PW) and 84 were lactating women (LW). The overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance (immediate and delayed) level was substantially high (70.2%), with a significant difference between PW (76.6%) and LW (48.8%). Out of the 70.2% who agreed to receive the vaccine, 3.6% indicated immediate acceptance, and 66.6% indicated delayed acceptance. Only 13.3% of the participants indicated their acceptance of their physician's vaccination recommendation during pregnancy or while lactating, and 62.2% were against it. Our results agreed with the recent studies that revealed that PW tended to have a high level of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and they were also inclined to resist professional recommendations because they predominantly preferred to delay their vaccination. The pregnancy trimester, education level, employment status, and previous live births were significant determinants for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. The most commonly preferred vaccine type was mRNA-based vaccines, followed by viral vector-based and inactivated virus vaccines. The first top priority of PLW was vaccine safety for their children, followed by vaccine safety for the PLW and vaccine effectiveness. Regarding psychosocial predictors, media/social media, trust in the government, the pharmaceutical industry, and healthcare professionals, partners, and a positive risk-benefit ratio were significant promoters for COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Findings from this study suggest that promotional interventions targeting PLW should use web platforms and focus on vaccine safety evidence, the expected benefits of vaccines and potential harms of the infection.

Side Effects of mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccines among Young Adults (18-30 Years Old): An Independent Post-Marketing Study.

Young adults had been widely perceived as a low-risk group for COVID-19 severity; therefore, they were deprioritised within the mass vaccination strategies as their prognosis of COVID-19 infection is relatively more favourable than older age groups. On the other hand, vaccination of this demographic group is indispensable to achieve herd immunity. A cross-sectional survey-based study was used to evaluate the side effects of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines among university students in the Czech Republic. The validated questionnaire was delivered in a digital form, and it consisted of demographic data; COVID-19 vaccine-related anamnesis; and local, systemic, orofacial, and skin-related side effects' prevalence, onset, and duration. Out of the 539 included participants, 70.1% were females and 45.8% were <23 years old. The vast majority (95.2%) reported at least one side effect. The most common side effect was injection site pain (91.8%), followed by fatigue (62.5%), headache (36.4%), and muscle pain (34.9%). The majority of local side effects occurred after both doses (74.4%), while most systemic side effects occurred after the second dose only (56.2%). Most local (94.2%) and systemic (93.3%) side effects resolved within three days after vaccination. Females participants' adjusted odds ratio (AOR) showed they were 2.566 (CI 95%: 1.103-5.970) times more likely to experience post-vaccination side effects, and the participants who received two doses reported an increased AOR of 1.896 (0.708-5.077) for experiencing side effects. The results of this study imply that mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are highly probably safe for young adults, and further studies are required to investigate the role of medical anamnesis, prior COVID-19 infection, and gender in side effects incidence.

Universal Predictors of Dental Students' Attitudes towards COVID-19 Vaccination: Machine Learning-Based Approach.

BACKGROUND: young adults represent a critical target for mass-vaccination strategies of COVID-19 that aim to achieve herd immunity. Healthcare students, including dental students, are perceived as the upper echelon of health literacy; therefore, their health-related beliefs, attitudes and behaviors influence their peers and communities. The main aim of this study was to synthesize a data-driven model for the predictors of COVID-19 vaccine willingness among dental students. METHODS: a secondary analysis of data extracted from a recently conducted multi-center and multi-national cross-sectional study of dental students' attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination in 22 countries was carried out utilizing decision tree and regression analyses. Based on previous literature, a proposed conceptual model was developed and tested through a machine learning approach to elicit factors related to dental students' willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine. RESULTS: machine learning analysis suggested five important predictors of COVID-19 vaccination willingness among dental students globally, i.e., the economic level of the country where the student lives and studies, the individual's trust of the pharmaceutical industry, the individual's misconception of natural immunity, the individual's belief of vaccines risk-benefit-ratio, and the individual's attitudes toward novel vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: according to the socio-ecological theory, the country's economic level was the only contextual predictor, while the rest were individual predictors. Future research is recommended to be designed in a longitudinal fashion to facilitate evaluating the proposed model. The interventions of controlling vaccine hesitancy among the youth population may benefit from improving their views of the risk-benefit ratio of COVID-19 vaccines. Moreover, healthcare students, including dental students, will likely benefit from increasing their awareness of immunization and infectious diseases through curricular amendments.

Prevalence and Drivers of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy among Czech University Students: National Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: university students are believed to retain the highest levels of health literacy. They are perceived as the opinion leaders within their communities; therefore, their health-related beliefs and attitudes are deemed important for public health campaigns. This study aimed to investigate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy drivers among university students in the Czech Republic. METHODS: a cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was carried out in the weeks before the unrestricted vaccine deployment to Czech adults. The questionnaire had 21 multiple-choice items stratified in 4 categories; demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related anamnesis and influenza vaccine experience, attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination, and the possible drivers of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy suggested by the WHO-SAGE. RESULTS: out of the 1351 included students, 66.8% were females, 84.5% were Czech nationals, and 40.6% enrolled in healthcare programs. The overall COVID-19 vaccine acceptance level was 73.3%, 19.3% of participants were vaccine-resistant, and only 7.4% were vaccine-hesitant. Trust in the pharmaceutical industry, trust in healthcare providers, and perceived knowledge sufficiency predicted higher odds of vaccine acceptance. In contrast, media and social media, personal beliefs, immunity misconception, previous COVID-19 infection, and suspicions about novel vaccines and the local availability predicted higher odds of vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study predict a fair probability to achieve community immunity (herd immunity) among the target population group. The primary prevention strategies in the Czech Republic need to be culturally sensitive and inclusive for foreign nationals. As one-quarter of the participating students are dependent on vaccine safety data, this study findings support the call for independent studies evaluating the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 Vaccines Safety Tracking (CoVaST): Protocol of a Multi-Center Prospective Cohort Study for Active Surveillance of COVID-19 Vaccines' Side Effects.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccine-related side effects have a determinant role in the public decision regarding vaccination. Therefore, this study has been designed to actively monitor the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines globally. METHODS: A multi-country, three-phase study including a cross-sectional survey to test for the short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among target population groups. In the second phase, we will monitor the booster doses' side effects, while in the third phase, the long-term safety and effectiveness will be investigated. A validated, self-administered questionnaire will be used to collect data from the target population; Results: The study protocol has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, with the identifier NCT04834869. CONCLUSIONS: CoVaST is the first independent study aiming to monitor the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines following booster doses, and the long-term safety and effectiveness of said vaccines.

Safety of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine: Independent Evidence from Two EU States.

Recent reports of thrombosis following AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in young females (<55 years-old) led to temporary suspension and urgent investigation by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) that concluded that vaccine benefits still outweigh its side effects (SEs). Therefore, this study aims to provide early independent evidence on the vaccine SEs' prevalence and their potential risk factors; a cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out between February and March 2021 in Germany and Czech Republic among healthcare workers who recently received the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. The study used a validated self-administered questionnaire composed of twenty-eight multiple-choice items covering demographic variables, medical anamneses, and local, systemic, oral, and skin related SEs of the vaccine. Out of the ninety-two included participants, 77.2% were females and 79.3% were from Germany. Their mean age was 35.37 ± 12.62 (19-64) years-old, 15.2% had chronic illnesses and 22.8% were receiving medical treatments. Overall, 94.6% of the participants reported at least one SE. The most common local SE was injection site pain (72.8%), and the most common systemic SEs were fatigue (73.9%), muscle pain (55.4%), chills (48.9%), feeling unwell (46.7%), nausea (45.7%), and headache (29.3%). The vast majority (91.9%) resolved within 1-3 days, and the below 35 years-old group was the least affected age group. The SEs' frequency was insignificantly higher in females and previously infected participants; the vaccine safety for the elderly was supported by the early findings of this study. Chronic illnesses and medical treatments were not associated with an increased risk of SE incidence and frequency. No blood disorder SEs were reported in our sample. Further independent studies are highly required to evaluate the safety of the AstraZeneca vaccine and to explore whether gender or previous infection could be associated with the vaccine SEs.

Global Prevalence and Drivers of Dental Students' COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy.

BACKGROUND: Acceleration of mass vaccination strategies is the only pathway to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare professionals and students have a key role in shaping public opinion about vaccines. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of dental students globally towards COVID-19 vaccines and explore the potential drivers for students' acceptance levels. METHODS: A global cross-sectional study was carried out in February 2021 using an online questionnaire. The study was liaised by the scientific committee of the International Association of Dental Students (IADS), and data were collected through the national and local coordinators of IADS member organizations. The dependent variable was the willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine, and the independent variables included demographic characteristics, COVID-19-related experience, and the drivers of COVID-19 vaccine-related attitude suggested by the WHO SAGE. RESULTS: A total of 6639 students from 22 countries, representing all world regions, responded to the questionnaire properly. Their mean age was 22.1 ± 2.8 (17-40) years, and the majority were females (70.5%), in clinical years (66.8%), and from upper-middle-income economies (45.7%). In general, 22.5% of dental students worldwide were hesitant, and 13.9% rejected COVID-19 vaccines. The students in low- and lower-middle-income (LLMI) economies had significantly higher levels of vaccine hesitancy compared to their peers in upper-middle- and high-income (UMHI) economies (30.4% vs. 19.8%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The global acceptance level of dental students for COVID-19 vaccines was suboptimal, and their worrisome level of vaccine hesitancy was influenced by the socioeconomic context where the dental students live and study. The media and social media, public figures, insufficient knowledge about vaccines, and mistrust of governments and the pharmaceutical industry were barriers to vaccination. The findings of this study call for further implementation of epidemiology (infectious diseases) education within undergraduate dental curricula.

Prevalence of COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects among Healthcare Workers in the Czech Republic.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine side effects have a fundamental role in public confidence in the vaccine and its uptake process. Thus far, the evidence on vaccine safety has exclusively been obtained from the manufacturer-sponsored studies; therefore, this study was designed to provide independent evidence on Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine side effects. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey-based study was carried out between January and February 2021 to collect data on the side effects following the COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers in the Czech Republic. The study used a validated questionnaire with twenty-eight multiple-choice items covering the participants' demographic data, medical anamneses, COVID-19-related anamneses, general, oral, and skin-related side effects. RESULTS: Injection site pain (89.8%), fatigue (62.2%), headache (45.6%), muscle pain (37.1%), and chills (33.9%) were the most commonly reported side effects. All the general side effects were more prevalent among the ≤43-year-old group, and their duration was mainly one day (45.1%) or three days (35.8%) following the vaccine. Antihistamines were the most common drugs associated with side effects, thus requiring further investigation. The people with two doses were generally associated with a higher frequency of side effects. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of side effects among Czech healthcare workers was highly consistent with the manufacturer's data, especially in terms of their association with the younger age group and the second dose. The overall prevalence of some local and systemic side effects was higher than the manufacturer's report. Further independent studies on vaccine safety are strongly required to strengthen public confidence in the vaccine.