Correlation Between Healthcare Workers' Knowledge of Influenza Vaccine and Vaccine Receipt

2003 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 845-847 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Martinello ◽  
Laura Jones ◽  
Jeffrey E. Topal
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Nursing Staff ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Basic Knowledge ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractObjective:Influenza vaccine receipt by healthcare workers (HCWs) is important because HCWs are at risk for occupational exposure to influenza and may act as vectors in the nosocomial transmission of influenza. HCWs were surveyed to determine whether belief in commonly held influenza vaccine misconceptions was associated with influenza vaccine acceptance.Design:Cross-sectional study.Setting:A large urban teaching hospital.Method:A self-administered survey was used to assess nursing and physician staff influenza vaccine knowledge, current vaccination status, and potential reasons for vaccine declination.Results:Two hundred twelve of 215 surveys were completed. The overall influenza vaccination rate was 73%. Physician staff were significantly more likely to have been vaccinated compared with nursing staff (82% vs 62%, respectively; P = .0009). HCWs answering the 5 influenza vaccine basic knowledge questions correctly were significantly more likely to have been vaccinated than those responding incorrectly to any question (84% vs 64%, respectively; P = .002). This association was present in the nursing group where 80% of those answering the knowledge questions correctly were vaccinated, but only 49% of those answering incorrectly were vaccinated (P = .000005). However, in the physician group, there was no significant difference in the influenza vaccination rates between those answering correctly and those answering incorrectly (P = .459).Conclusion:Belief in commonly held influenza vaccine misconceptions was significantly associated with influenza vaccine declination among nursing staff and may act as a barrier to greater rates of influenza vaccination. Reasons for influenza vaccine nonreceipt may differ between nursing and physician staff.

scholarly journals The influence of a community intervention on influenza vaccination knowledge and behavior among diabetic patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lili Tao ◽  
Ming Lu ◽  
Xiaoning Wang ◽  
Xiaoyan Han ◽  
Shuming Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Community Intervention ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Diabetic Patients ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Experimental Group

Abstract Background This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of a comprehensive community intervention on cognition and inoculation behaviors of diabetic patients immunized with influenza vaccine. Methods A total of 1538 diabetic patients aged 35 years and above for outpatient visits and follow-up treatments were selected from six community health service centers (three for the experimental group, and the other three for the control group) in Chaoyang District, Beijing. Comprehensive interventions applied to the experimental group include patient intervention and community climate interventions. We compared the total awareness of influenza vaccine knowledge and influenza vaccination rates between the two groups before and after the intervention. Results Before the intervention, the total awareness rate of influenza vaccine in the experimental group and the control group was similar (50.6 and 50.2%, respectively. P = 0.171). After the intervention, the awareness rate of influenza vaccine in the experimental group and the control group increased. The amplitude of the increase was similar (70.3 and 70.1%, respectively. P = 0.822,). Before the intervention, there was no significant difference in the influenza vaccination rate between the experimental group and the control group (29.0 and 26.8%, respectively. P = 0.334). After the intervention, the vaccination rate of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group. The difference was statistically significant (The vaccination rate 45.8 and 27.4% for the experimental group and the control group, respectively. P < 0.001). Conclusion Comprehensive community interventions had a positive effect on vaccination in diabetic patients. Trial registration ChiCTR1900025194, registered in Aug,16th, 2019. Retrospectively registered.

scholarly journals Promotion of the influenza vaccination to hospital staff during pre-employment health check: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Currat ◽  
Catherine Lazor-Blanchet ◽  
Giorgio Zanetti
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Vaccination Campaign ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Health Check ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Newly Hired

Abstract Background Vaccination is the most effective prevention of seasonal influenza. Despite its recommendation and active promotion, vaccination coverage remains low among healthcare staff. The goal of the study was to test if a pre-employment health check is a good opportunity to promote future vaccination against influenza among healthcare workers newly hired by a university hospital. Methods All new hospital employees active at the bedside who underwent a pre-employment health check between the end of 2016’s influenza epidemic and the start of the next influenza vaccination campaign were randomly allocated to a control group or an intervention group. The intervention consisted of a semi-structured dialog and the release of an information leaflet about influenza and influenza vaccination during the check-up, and the shipment of a postcard reminder 2 weeks before the next vaccination campaign. Vaccination rates during the campaign were compared among the two groups. Results Three hundred fifty-seven employees were included. Vaccination rates were similar in both groups: 79/172 (46%) in the control and 92/185 (50%) in the intervention group. A significantly higher rate of vaccination was noted among physicians (70/117, 60%) than among other employees (101/240, 42%, p = 0.001). In a pre-defined exploratory analysis among physicians, the vaccination rate was higher in the intervention group (36/51, 71%) than in the control group (34/65, 52%, p = 0.046). Conclusions Promotion of the influenza vaccine during pre-employment health check did not improve the vaccination rate of newly hired hospital healthcare workers overall during the next influenza vaccination campaign. Results suggest a favourable impact on the vaccination rate of physicians. Thus, there may be an interest in using communication strategies tailored to the different categories of healthcare workers to promote the influenza vaccine during pre-employment health check. Trial registration ClinicalTrials, NCT02758145. Registered 26 April 2016.

Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome and the Perceived Avian Influenza Epidemic on the Increased Rate of Influenza Vaccination Among Nurses in Hong Kong

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennise K. P. Tam ◽  
Shui-Shan Lee ◽  
Sing Lee
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Avian Influenza ◽  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Influenza Infection ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Major Barrier ◽  
Vaccination Rates

Objective.To determine the rate of influenza vaccination and the factors associated with the vaccination's acceptance among nurses in Hong Kong.Design.Cross-sectional survey.Participants.Nurses practicing between 2003 and 2007.Methods.A questionnaire was sent to all nurses registered with any of the 3 nursing associations that participated in this study.Results.A total of 941 completed questionnaires were available for analysis, though not all nurses responded to every question (response rate, 33.5%-36.3%). Vaccination rates in 2006 and 2007 were 57.2% and 46.2%, respectively. Nurses who were vaccinated in 2006 were more likely to get vaccinated in 2007 (P<.01); 56% of the nurses perceived influenza vaccine as being effective against influenza. The perceived effectiveness of influenza vaccine was a consistent predictor of rates of vaccination in 2006 (odds ratio [OR], 8.47 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 6.13-11.70];P<.01) and 2007 (OR, 6.05 [95% CI, 3.79-9.67];P<.01). Concern about contracting avian influenza was a predictor of the vaccination rate in 2006 but not in 2007 (OR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.03-2.09];P<.05), as was the perceived lack of control over avian influenza infection (OR, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.06-2.18];P<.05).Conclusions.The overall influenza vaccination rate for nurses in Hong Kong was about 50%. It was affected by the perceived threat of an impending outbreak. The attitudes of nurses toward the effectiveness of and rationale for vaccination were a major barrier to increasing the rate of vaccination.

scholarly journals Influence of health literacy on acceptance of influenza and pertussis vaccinations: a cross-sectional study among Spanish pregnant women

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e022132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Castro-Sánchez ◽  
Rafael Vila-Candel ◽  
Francisco J Soriano-Vidal ◽  
Esther Navarro-Illana ◽  
Javier Díez-Domingo
Keyword(s):  
Health Literacy ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Vaccination Decision

ObjectivesImmunisations against influenza andBordetella pertussisinfection are recommended to pregnant women in Valencia (Spain), yet vaccination rates remain low. Health literacy (HL) appears as a crucial factor in vaccination decision-making. We explored the relation between HL of pregnant women and decisions to receive influenza and pertussis immunisations.SettingUniversity hospital in Valencia (Spain).Participants119 women who gave birth at a hospital in Valencia (Spain) between November 2015 and May 2016. Women in the immediate postpartum period (more than 27 weeks of gestation), between November 2015 and May 2016 were included in the study. Women with impairments, language barriers or illiteracy which prevented completion of the questionnaires, or those who were under 18 years were excluded from enrolment.Primary and secondary outcome measuresHL level; influenza and pertussis immunisation rate; reasons for rejection of vaccination.Results119 participants were included (mean age 32.3±5.5 years, 52% primiparous, 95% full-term deliveries). A higher education level was associated with Short Assessment of Health Literacy for Spanish Adults _50 (adjusted R2=0.22, p=0.014) and Newest Vital Sign (adjusted R2=0.258, p=0.001) scores. Depending on the scale, 56%–85% of participants had adequate HL. 52% (62/119) and 94% (112/119) of women received influenza and pertussis immunisation, respectively. Women rejecting influenza vaccine had a higher HL level (measured by SALHSA_50 tool) than those accepting it (Kruskal-Wallis test p=0.022). 24% of women who declined influenza vaccination felt the vaccine was unnecessary, and 23% claimed to have insufficient information.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccination rate was suboptimal in our study. Women with high HL were more likely to decline immunisation. Information from professionals needs to match patients' HL levels to reduce negative perceptions of vaccination.

Survey on Use of and Attitudes Toward Influenza Vaccination Among Emergency Department Staff in a New York Metropolitan Hospital

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 618-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Piccirillo ◽  
Theodore Gaeta
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
New York ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
Basic Knowledge ◽  
Emergency Medical Service Personnel ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Point Of Entry ◽  
Vaccination Recommendations

Objective.Recognizing that the potential transmission of influenza virus would be concentrated at a hospital's primary point of entry, we determined rates of staff compliance with the influenza vaccination recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in the Emergency Department (ED). We describe the basic knowledge concerning influenza transmission and factors influencing vaccination decisions among ED staff.Design.Cross-sectional study.Setting and Participants.A large urban teaching hospital. Participants included ED staff, visiting professionals from other departments, and emergency medical service personnel transferring patients to the hospital.Results.Of 230 surveys that were distributed, 200 were completed. One hundred one respondents (51%) were female. The overall influenza vaccination rate was 50%. Having had influenza previously was the most instrumental factor in whether or not a respondent chose vaccination (P<.001). Use of the Employees Health Services Free Vaccine Program (FVP) was a very important factor influencing whether ED staff sought influenza vaccination (P<.0001). Prior knowledge of the ACIP recommendations proved to be not statistically important (P = .03). A significant factor for respondents declining vaccination was the concern that illness could be caused by the vaccine (P<.0001). Variables such as sex of the respondents (P = .6714) and type of job (P = .3628) were not associated with vaccination.Conclusion.Despite ACIP recommendations, 50% of respondents did not receive an influenza vaccination. Misconceptions regarding influenza vaccine efficacy, concerns about adverse effects, and fear of contracting illness were significantly associated with noncompliance with vaccination. Variables that were important contributors to compliance with vaccination were prior influenza illness and services rendered by the FVP.

scholarly journals Knowledge, Attitudes and Uptake Related to Influenza Vaccine Among Healthcare Workers in Tunisia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ines Cherif ◽  
Ghassen Kharroubi ◽  
Leila Bouabid ◽  
Adel Gharbi ◽  
Aicha Boukthir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Educational Level ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Influenza Season ◽  
Influenza Infection ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
World Health ◽  
High Educational Level ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract Background:The influenza vaccine (IV) is considered the most effective strategy to prevent seasonal influenza infection and annual vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) is recommended by the World Health Organization given their high mixing with patients. We assessed IV uptake among HCWs in the 2018-2019 season and explored their knowledge and attitudes regarding influenza immunization.Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted in 150 representative Tunisian health facilities from March to May 2019. We recruited 1,231 HCWs with direct patient contact using self-weighted multistage sampling. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses permitted to assess the factors associated with IV uptake in the 2018­–2019 influenza season. Results:Among 1,231 health professionals enrolled in this study, less than half (36.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 33.9-39.4) received the IV at least once in their lives and only 15.3% (CI: 13.3-17.4) were vaccinated against influenza in the 2018–2019 influenza season. High confidence regarding IV efficacy, belief about the mandatory character of influenza vaccination for HCWs, and IV uptake in the 4 years preceding the 2018­–2019 influenza season were independently associated with higher IV uptake by multivariate analysis. However, participants with high educational level were less likely to receive the IV than those with the lowest educational level. Conclusions:Our study revealed a low vaccination rate among Tunisian HCWs confirming the importance of tailored education programs targeting this population.

scholarly journals Knowledge, attitudes and uptake related to influenza vaccine among healthcare workers during the 2018–2019 influenza season in Tunisia

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ines Cherif ◽  
Ghassen Kharroubi ◽  
Leila Bouabid ◽  
Adel Gharbi ◽  
Aicha Boukthir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Educational Level ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Influenza Season ◽  
Influenza Infection ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Vaccination Rate ◽  
World Health ◽  
High Educational Level ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract Background The influenza vaccine (IV) is considered the most effective strategy to prevent seasonal influenza infection and annual vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) is recommended by the World Health Organization given their high mixing with patients. We assessed IV uptake among HCWs in the 2018–2019 season and explored their knowledge and attitudes regarding influenza immunization. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted in 150 representative Tunisian health facilities from March to May 2019. We recruited 1231 HCWs with direct patient contact using self-weighted multistage sampling. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses permitted to assess the factors associated with IV uptake in the 2018–2019 influenza season. Results Among 1231 health professionals enrolled in this study, less than half (36.6, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 33.9–39.4) received the IV at least once in their lives and only 15.3% (CI: 13.3–17.4) were vaccinated against influenza in the 2018–2019 influenza season. High confidence regarding IV efficacy, belief about the mandatory character of influenza vaccination for HCWs, and IV uptake in the 4 years preceding the 2018–2019 influenza season were independently associated with higher IV uptake by multivariate analysis. However, participants with high educational level were less likely to receive the IV than those with the lowest educational level. Conclusions Our study revealed a low vaccination rate among Tunisian HCWs confirming the importance of tailored education programs targeting this population.

scholarly journals Healthcare Workers’ Perspectives on the Upcoming COVID-19 Vaccine in Terms of Their Exposure to the Influenza Vaccine in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 465
Author(s):  
Leena R. Baghdadi ◽  
Shatha G. Alghaihb ◽  
Alanoud A. Abuhaimed ◽  
Dania M. Alkelabi ◽  
Rawan S. Alqahtani
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Work Experience ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Seasonal Influenza Vaccine ◽  
History Of

In 2019, a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)) caused a global pandemic. There was an urgent need to develop a vaccine against COVID-19 to reduce its spread and economic burden. The main objective of this study was to understand the attitudes and concerns of healthcare workers (HCWs) towards the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine, whether their decision was influenced by their history of taking the seasonal influenza vaccine, and factors that influence the acceptance of the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine. This was a cross-sectional study conducted in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. We selected and surveyed 356 HCWs via an electronic self-administered questionnaire. A total of 61.16% of HCWs were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, and 55.9% of them had received the seasonal influenza vaccine in the preceding year (2019–2020). The strongest predictors for taking the COVID-19 vaccine were the HCWs’ belief that the COVID-19 vaccine would be safe, needed even for healthy people, that all HCWs should be vaccinated against COVID-19, and that HCWs will have time to take the vaccine. Being female, being middle aged, having <5 years of work experience, having no fear of injections, and being a non-smoker were predictive factors for taking the upcoming COVID-19 vaccine. No associations were found between the intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine and a history of taking the seasonal influenza vaccine.

scholarly journals Influenza vaccination and the risk of COVID-19 infection and severe illness in older adults in the United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly Huang ◽  
Shu-Wen Lin ◽  
Wang-Huei Sheng ◽  
Chi-Chuan Wang
Keyword(s):  
Immune Responses ◽  
Influenza Vaccine ◽  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Severe Illness ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Health Database

AbstractThe coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic and led to nearly three million deaths globally. As of April 2021, there are still many countries that do not have COVID-19 vaccines. Before the COVID-19 vaccines were developed, some evidence suggested that an influenza vaccine may stimulate nonspecific immune responses that reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection or the severity of COVID-19 illness after infection. This study evaluated the association between influenza vaccination and the risk of COVID-19 infection. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study with data from July 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020 with the Claims data from Symphony Health database. The study population was adults age 65 years old or older who received influenza vaccination between September 1 and December 31 of 2019. The main outcomes and measures were odds of COVID-19 infection and severe COVID-19 illness after January 15, 2020. We found the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of COVID-19 infection risk between the influenza-vaccination group and no-influenza-vaccination group was 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.75–0.77). Among COVID-19 patients, the aOR of developing severe COVID-19 illness was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.68–0.76) between the influenza-vaccination group and the no-influenza-vaccination group. When the influenza-vaccination group and the other-vaccination group were compared, the aOR of COVID-19 infection was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.93–0.97), and the aOR of developing a severe COVID-19 illness was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.80–1.13). The influenza vaccine may marginally protect people from COVID-19 infection.

scholarly journals Influenza Vaccination in Psoriatic Patients—Epidemiology and Patient Perceptions: A German Multicenter Study (Vac-Pso)

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 843
Author(s):  
Christian Kromer ◽  
Phoebe Wellmann ◽  
Ralf Siemer ◽  
Selina Klein ◽  
Johannes Mohr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Influenza Vaccination ◽  
Inflammatory Diseases ◽  
Influenza Virus Infection ◽  
Multivariate Regression Analysis ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Patient Perceptions ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Disease Characteristics ◽  
History Of

The risk of developing severe complications from an influenza virus infection is increased in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis (PsO) and atopic dermatitis (AD). However, low influenza vaccination rates have been reported. The aim of this study was to determine vaccination rates in PsO compared to AD patients and explore patient perceptions of vaccination. A multicenter cross-sectional study was performed in 327 and 98 adult patients with PsO and AD, respectively. Data on vaccination, patient and disease characteristics, comorbidity, and patient perceptions was collected with a questionnaire. Medical records and vaccination certificates were reviewed. A total of 49.8% of PsO and 32.7% of AD patients were vaccinated at some point, while in season 2018/2019, 30.9% and 13.3% received an influenza vaccination, respectively. There were 96.6% and 77.6% of PsO and AD patients who had an indication for influenza vaccination due to age, immunosuppressive therapy, comorbidity, occupation, and/or pregnancy. Multivariate regression analysis revealed higher age (p < 0.001) and a history of bronchitis (p = 0.023) as significant predictors of influenza vaccination in PsO patients. Considering that most patients had an indication for influenza vaccination, the rate of vaccinated patients was inadequately low.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document