RESUMO
The rapid development of the vaccine and the infodemia have challenged communication about COVID-19 vaccines. This study aims to characterize-through the experience of vaccinators-the challenges faced during COVID-19 vaccination consultations and the communication strategies adopted. A qualitative study was conducted on COVID-19 vaccinators in Tuscany, Italy. Face-to-face interviews were conducted and examined by thematic analysis. In total, 30 vaccinators were interviewed. Four main themes emerged. The first highlighted distinct profiles of users' attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination. Barriers and promoters of vaccine uptake emerged in the second theme: concerns over the vaccine, excessive exposure to information, and a lack of clear guidance from institutions were the main factors behind hesitancy. The third theme highlighted users' information-seeking behaviors; vaccinators observed that users ideologically opposed to the vaccine (IOV) unconsciously seek information that confirms their theories. The last theme comprised communication strategies for dealing with hesitancy. Empathy, first-hand examples, transparency, and tailored communication style appear to be effective in building vaccine trust. Lastly, the impossibility of developing a decision-making partnership with IOVs was noticed. These findings may help to better characterize public attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and highlight key communication principles and strategies to foster vaccine confidence.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The ongoing refugee crisis has revealed the need for enhancing primary health care (PHC) professionals' skills and training. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to strengthen PHC professionals in European countries in the provision of high-quality care for refugees and migrants by offering a concise modular training that was based on the needs of the refugees and PHC professionals as shown by prior research in the EUR-HUMAN project. METHODS: We developed, piloted, and evaluated an online capacity building course of 8 stand-alone modules containing information about acute health issues of refugees, legal issues, provider-patient communication and cultural aspects of health and illness, mental health, sexual and reproductive health, child health, chronic diseases, health promotion, and prevention. The English course template was translated into seven languages and adapted to the local contexts of six countries. Pre- and post-completion knowledge tests were administered to effectively assess the progress and knowledge increase of participants so as to issue CME certificates. An online evaluation survey post completion was used to assess the acceptability and practicability of the course from the participant perspective. These data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 390 participants registered for the online course in 6 countries with 175 completing all modules of the course, 47.7 % of them medical doctors. The mean time for completion was 10.77 hours. In total, 123 participants completed the online evaluation survey; the modules on acute health needs, legal issues (both 44.1%), and provider-patient communication/cultural issues (52.9%) were found particularly important for the daily practice. A majority expressed a will to promote the online course among their peers. CONCLUSION: This course is a promising learning tool for PHC professionals and when relevant supportive conditions are met. The course has the potential to empower PHC professionals in their work with refugees and other migrants.
