scholarly journals Attitudes towards vaccines and intention to vaccinate against COVID-19: Implications for public health communications in Australia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Enticott ◽  
Jaskirath Gill ◽  
Simon Bacon ◽  
Kim Lavoie ◽  
Dan Epstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
List Type ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
Vaccine Confidence ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Intent To Continue

AbstractObjectiveTo examine SARS-CoV-2 vaccine confidence, attitudes and intentions in Australian adults.MethodsNationwide survey in February-March 2021 of adults representative across sex, age and location. Vaccine uptake and a range of putative drivers of uptake, including vaccine confidence, socioeconomic status, and sources of trust, were examined using logistic and Bayesian regressions for vaccines generally and for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.ResultsOverall 1,166 surveys were collected from participants aged 18-90 years (mean 52, SD of 19). Seventy-eight percent reported being likely to receive a vaccine against COVID-19. Higher SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions were associated with: increasing age (OR: 1.04 95%CI [1.03-1.044]), being male (OR: 1.37, 95% CI [1.08 – 1.72]), residing in the least disadvantaged area quintile (OR: 2.27 95%CI [1.53 – 3.37]) and a self-perceived high risk of getting COVID-19 (OR: 1.52 95% CI [1.08 – 2.14]). However, 72% of participants did not believe that they were at a high risk of getting COVID-19. Findings regarding vaccines in general were similar except there were no sex differences. For both the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and vaccines in general, there were no differences in intentions to vaccinate as a function of education level, perceived income level, and rurality. Knowing that the vaccine is safe and effective, and that getting vaccinated will protect others, trusting the company that made it and getting vaccination recommended by a doctor were reported to influence a large proportion of the study cohort to uptake the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Seventy-eight percent reported the intent to continue engaging in virus-protecting behaviours (mask wearing, social distancing etc.) post-vaccine.ConclusionsSeventy-eight percent of Australians are likely to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Key influencing factors identified in this study (e.g. knowing that the vaccine is safe and effective, getting a doctor’s recommendation to get vaccinated) can be used to inform public health messaging to enhance vaccination rates.Strengths and limitations of this studyThis research captured a large, representative sample of the adult Australian population across age, sex, location, and socioeconomic status.We have self-reported Australian uptake intentions and attitudes on general vaccines and COVID-19 vaccine, and intent to continue engaging in virus-protecting behaviours (mask wearing, social distancing etc.) post SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.We examine a range of drivers and factors that may influence intent to get the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake, including vaccine confidence, demographics and socioeconomic status.The survey is based on established behavioural theories, and is the Australian arm of the international iCARE survey which to date has collected global comparative information from over 90,000 respondents in 140 countries.Our survey was only available in English, which may have led to an underrepresentation of ethnic groups, and participation was voluntary, so our sample may be prone to selection bias from those with more interest or engagement in COVID-19.

scholarly journals Attitudes towards vaccines and intention to vaccinate against COVID-19: a cross-sectional analysis—implications for public health communications in Australia

BMJ Open ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. e057127
Author(s):  
Joanne Enticott ◽  
Jaskirath Singh Gill ◽  
Simon L. Bacon ◽  
Kim L. Lavoie ◽  
Daniel S. Epstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Study Cohort ◽  
Disadvantaged Area ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Vaccine Confidence ◽  
To Receive

ObjectiveTo examine SARS-CoV-2 vaccine confidence, attitudes and intentions in Australian adults as part of the iCARE Study.Design and settingCross-sectional online survey conducted when free COVID-19 vaccinations first became available in Australia in February 2021.ParticipantsTotal of 1166 Australians from general population aged 18–90 years (mean 52, SD of 19).Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome: responses to question ‘If a vaccine for COVID-19 were available today, what is the likelihood that you would get vaccinated?’.Secondary outcome: analyses of putative drivers of uptake, including vaccine confidence, socioeconomic status and sources of trust, derived from multiple survey questions.ResultsSeventy-eight per cent reported being likely to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Higher SARS-CoV-2 vaccine intentions were associated with: increasing age (OR: 2.01 (95% CI 1.77 to 2.77)), being male (1.37 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.72)), residing in least disadvantaged area quintile (2.27 (95% CI 1.53 to 3.37)) and a self-perceived high risk of getting COVID-19 (1.52 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.14)). However, 72% did not believe they were at a high risk of getting COVID-19. Findings regarding vaccines in general were similar except there were no sex differences. For both the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and vaccines in general, there were no differences in intentions to vaccinate as a function of education level, perceived income level and rurality. Knowing that the vaccine is safe and effective and that getting vaccinated will protect others, trusting the company that made it and vaccination recommended by a doctor were reported to influence a large proportion of the study cohort to uptake the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Seventy-eight per cent reported the intent to continue engaging in virus-protecting behaviours (mask wearing, social distancing, etc) postvaccine.ConclusionsMost Australians are likely to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Key influencing factors identified (eg, knowing vaccine is safe and effective, and doctor’s recommendation to get vaccinated) can inform public health messaging to enhance vaccination rates.

scholarly journals Towards intervention development to increase the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among those at high risk: outlining evidence-based and theoretically informed future intervention content

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn Williams ◽  
Allyson J. Gallant ◽  
Susan Rasmussen ◽  
Louise A. Brown Nicholls ◽  
Nicola Cogan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
Behaviour Change ◽  
Barriers And Facilitators ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Free Text ◽  
List Type ◽  
Environmental Consequences ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Media Interventions

AbstractObjectivesDevelopment of a vaccine against COVID-19 will be key to controlling the pandemic. We need to understand the barriers and facilitators to receiving a future COVID-19 vaccine so that we can provide recommendations for the design of interventions aimed at maximising vaccine uptake by the public.DesignCross-sectional survey with ‘high-risk’ individuals (older adults aged 65+ and patients with chronic respiratory disease).MethodsDuring the UK’s early April 2020 ‘lockdown’ period, participants (N=527; mean age = 59.5 years) completed an online questionnaire assessing willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, perceptions of COVID-19, and intention to receive other vaccinations. The questionnaire included a free text response (n=502) to examine barriers and facilitators to uptake. The Behaviour Change Wheel informed the analysis of these responses, which were coded to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Behaviour change techniques (BCTs) were identified.ResultsEighty-six percent of respondents want to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. This was positively correlated with the perception that COVID-19 will continue for a long time, and negatively associated with the perception that the media has over-exaggerated the risk. The majority of barriers and facilitators could be mapped onto the ‘beliefs about consequences’ TDF domain, with themes relating to personal health, health consequences to others, concerns of vaccine safety, and severity of COVID-19.ConclusionsWillingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination is currently high among high-risk individuals. Mass media interventions aimed at maximising vaccine uptake should utilise the BCTs of information about health, emotional, social and environmental consequences, and salience of consequences.Statement of ContributionWhat is already known on this subject?Uptake of a vaccine for COVID-19 will be vital for controlling the pandemic, but the success of this strategy relies on public acceptance of the vaccine.Uptake of vaccinations and public confidence in vaccines has been falling in recent years.Evidence suggests that 26% of the French population would not want to receive a COVID-19 vaccination.What does this study add?This study found that 86% of our sample of high-risk participants in the UK are willing to receive a future vaccine for COVID-19.This study showed that perceived barriers and facilitators to uptake of the COVID-19 vaccination concentrated on the ‘beliefs about consequences’ TDF domain.This study suggests that the content of mass media interventions to improve vaccine uptake should focus on the BCTs of information about health, emotional, social and environmental consequences, and salience of consequences. These techniques should be pitched in relation to both self and, most importantly, to others.

scholarly journals Engaging general population: Vaccine confidence, communication and mandatory law

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
P L Lopalco
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
General Population ◽  
Core Competencies ◽  
Rapid Evolution ◽  
Effective Communication ◽  
Communication Strategy ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Novel Technologies ◽  
Vaccine Confidence

Abstract Hesitancy is defined as the reluctance or refusal to be vaccinated even in case of vaccine availability and is included by the WHO among the top ten threats to global health. Vaccine confidence is an essential component of the hesitancy. Fear of adverse events and lack of trust in vaccine efficacy discourage the public and drive them toward the choice of refusal. Misinformation and lack of effective communication strategies may seriously jeopardize vaccination programmes. Providing effective communication requires specific competencies that often are not part of the common core competencies of those involved in vaccination programmes. In particular, the rapid evolution of the communication environment due to novel technologies makes the task even more difficult. The general population in order to comply with the official vaccine recommendation throughout the life course is therefore a complex task. In the presence of worrying signals of lack of vaccine confidence, public health decision can be driven by emergency decisions rather than investing in mid-terms communication programmes. Vaccination mandates are public health measures that are proven to be effective in increasing vaccine uptake. Increasing anti-vaccine sentiment may be a potential negative trade-off. For this reason, the introduction of vaccination mandates should be combined with a structured communication strategy. In addition, vaccine sentiment should be actively monitored when any change in vaccine offer policy is implemented.

scholarly journals Impact of social distancing measures for preventing coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna Regmi ◽  
Cho Mar Lwin
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
List Type ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Impact

AbstractIntroductionSocial distancing measures (SDMs) protect public health from the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the impact of SDMs has been inconsistent and unclear. This study aims to assess the effects of SDMs (e.g. isolation, quarantine) for reducing the transmission of COVID-19.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review meta-analysis research of both randomised controlled trials and non-randomised controlled trials. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied & Complementary Medicine, COVID-19 Research and WHO database on COVID-19 for primary studies assessing the effects of SDMs (e.g. isolation, quarantine) for reducing the transmission of COVID-19, and will be reported in accordance with PRISMA statement. The PRISMA-P checklist will be used while preparing this protocol. We will use Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines (JBI Critical Appraisal Checklists) to assess the methodological qualities and synthesised performing thematic analysis. Two reviewers will independently screen the papers and extracted data. If sufficient data are available, the random-effects model for meta-analysis will be performed to measure the effect size of SDMs or the strengths of relationships. To assess the heterogeneity of effects, I2 together with the observed effects (Q-value, with degrees of freedom) will be used to provide the true effects in the analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval and consent will not be required for this systematic review of the literature as it does not involve human participation. We will be able to disseminate the study findings using the following strategies: we will be publishing at least one paper in peer-reviewed journals, and an abstract will be presented at suitable national/international conferences or workshops. We will also share important information with public health authorities as well as with the World Health Organization. In addition, we may post the submitted manuscript under review to bioRxiv, medRxiv, or other relevant pre-print servers.Strengths and limitations of this studyTo our knowledge, this study will be the first systematic review to examine the impact of social distancing measures to reduce transmission of COVID-19.This study will offer highest level of evidence for informed decisions, drawing a broader framework.This protocol reduces the possibility of duplication, provides transparency to the methods and procedures that will be used, minimise potential biases and allows peer-review.This research is not externally funded, and therefore time and resource will be constrained.If included studies will be variable in sample size, quality and population, which may open to bias, and the heterogeneity of data will preclude a meaningful meta-analysis to measure the impact of specific SDMs

scholarly journals Analysis of COVID-19 vaccine non-intent by essential vs non-essential worker, demographic, and socioeconomic status among 101,048 US adults

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0258540
Author(s):  
Tania Elliott ◽  
Baligh R. Yehia ◽  
Angela L. Winegar ◽  
Jyothi Karthik Raja ◽  
Ashlin Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Socioeconomic Status ◽  
District Of Columbia ◽  
Demographic Information ◽  
Public Health Measure ◽  
Primary Care Clinics ◽  
Health Measure ◽  
Survey Responses ◽  
To Receive

As of May 2021, over 286 million coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine doses have been administered across the country. This data is promising, however there are still populations that, despite availability, are declining vaccination. We reviewed vaccine likelihood and receptiveness to recommendation from a doctor or nurse survey responses from 101,048 adults (≥18 years old) presenting to 442 primary care clinics in 8 states and the District of Columbia. Occupation was self-reported and demographic information extracted from the medical record, with 58.3% (n = 58,873) responding they were likely to receive the vaccine, 23.6% (n = 23,845) unlikely, and 18.1% (n = 18,330) uncertain. We found that essential workers were 18% less likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccination. Of those who indicated they were not already “very likely” to receive the vaccine, a recommendation from a nurse or doctor resulted in 16% of respondents becoming more likely to receive the vaccine, although certain occupations were less likely than others to be receptive to recommendations. To our knowledge, this is the first study to look at vaccine intent and receptiveness to recommendations from a doctor or nurse across specific essential worker occupations, and may help inform future early phase, vaccine rollouts and public health measure implementations.

scholarly journals Estimating vaccine confidence levels among future healthcare workers and their trainers: A quantitative study protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth O. Oduwole ◽  
Hassan Mahomed ◽  
Birhanu T. Ayele ◽  
Charles S. Wiysonge
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Multinomial Logistic Regression ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
P Value ◽  
List Type ◽  
Confidence Levels ◽  
Vaccine Confidence ◽  
To Receive

ABSTRACTIntroductionThe outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caught the world off guard in the first quarter of the year 2020. To stem the tide of this pandemic, the development, testing, and pre-licensure approval for emergency use of some COVID 19 vaccine candidates were accelerated. This led to raised public concern about their safety and efficacy, compounding the challenges of vaccine hesitancy which was already declared one of the top ten threats to global health in the year 2019. The onus of managing and administering these vaccines to a skeptical populace when they do become available rests mostly on the shoulders of healthcare workers (HCWs). Therefore, the vaccine confidence levels of HCWs becomes critical to the success of vaccination endeavors, especially COVID 19 vaccination. This proposed study aims to estimate the level of vaccine confidence and the intention to receive a COVID 19 vaccine among future HCWs and their trainers at a specific university in Cape Town, South Africa, and to identify any vaccination concerns early for targeted intervention.Methods and analysisAn online survey will be distributed to current staff and students of an academic institution for HCWs. The survey questionnaire will consist of a demographic questions section consisting of six items and a vaccine confidence section comprising six items in Likert scale format.A multinomial logistic regression model will be employed to identify factors associated with vaccine confidence and intention. The strength of association will be assessed using odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval. Statistical significance will be defined at a p-value <0.05.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been obtained for the study from Stellenbosch University (HREC Reference # S19/01/014 (PhD)). The results will be shared with relevant health authorities, presented at conferences, and published in a peer-reviewed journal.ARTICLE SUMMARYStrengths and limitations of this study▸The proposed study will generate baseline knowledge of the vaccine confidence among future healthcare workers and their trainers in its specific context.▸It will contribute to addressing the knowledge gap about the intention to receive a COVID 19 vaccine among health care workers in Africa.▸It will enable the early identification of vaccine concerns of healthcare workers while they are still in training and assist in informing tailored measures to address them.▸A limitation of the study is the possibility of a low response rate which is an inherent challenge of online surveys.

Research Insights: Unintended Byproducts of News Coverage about Noncompliance: A Social Norms Exploration

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Déborah Martínez Villarreal ◽  
Cristina Parilli ◽  
Carlos Scartascini ◽  
Alberto Simpser
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Norms ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Knowing That

Social norms used in communications can help/hurt compliance with public health guidelines. In Mexico, a survey experiment was conducted to explore the knowledge-behavior gap in social distancing noncompliance. Despite believing that attending social gatherings is inappropriate, communicating to a person that friends are highly likely to attend the party increases the probability of generalizing others attendance and possibly their own. Believing that it is appropriate to attend a party during COVID-19 and knowing that most friends will go does not make one more likely to guess that a person will attend that party than if one believed it was not appropriate to attend the party. This represents a contradiction.

scholarly journals The impact of believing you have had COVID-19 on behaviour: Cross-sectional survey

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise E. Smith ◽  
Abigail L. Mottershaw ◽  
Mark Egan ◽  
Jo Waller ◽  
Theresa M. Marteau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
List Type ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Behavioural Insights ◽  
Prevalence Estimates ◽  
Competing Interest ◽  
The Uk

ABSTRACTObjectivesTo investigate whether people who think they have had COVID-19 are less likely to engage in social distancing measures compared with those who think they have not had COVID-19.DesignOn-line cross-sectional survey.SettingData were collected between 20th and 22nd April.Participants6149 participants living in the UK aged 18 years or over.Main outcome measuresPerceived immunity to COVID-19, self-reported adherence to social distancing measures (going out for essential shopping, nonessential shopping, and meeting up with friends/family; total out-of-home activity), worry about COVID-19 and perceived risk of COVID-19 to oneself and people in the UK. Knowledge that cough and high temperature / fever are the main symptoms of COVID-19.ResultsIn this sample, 1493 people (24.3%) thought they had had COVID-19. Only 245 (4.0%) reported receiving a test result saying they had COVID-19. Reported test results were often incongruent with participants’ belief that they had had COVID-19. People who believed that they had had COVID-19 were: more likely to agree that they had some immunity to COVID-19; less likely to report adhering to social distancing measures; less worried about COVID-19; and less likely to know that cough and high temperature / fever are two of the most common symptoms of COVID-19.ConclusionsThe number of people in the UK who think they have already had COVID-19 is about twice the rate of current prevalence estimates. People who think that they have had COVID-19 may contribute to transmission of the virus through non-adherence to social distancing measures. Clear communications to this growing group are needed to explain why protective measures continue to be important and to encourage sustained adherence.COPYRIGHTThe Corresponding Author has the right to grant on behalf of all authors and does grant on behalf of all authors, an exclusive licence (or non exclusive for government employees) on a worldwide basis to the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd to permit this article (if accepted) to be published in BMJ editions and any other BMJPGL products and sublicences such use and exploit all subsidiary rights, as set out in our licence.FUNDING SOURCESJW is funded by a career development fellowship from Cancer Research UK (ref C7492/A17219). LS and GJR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King’s College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care, Public Health England. Data collection was funded via a block Government grant to the Behavioural Insights Team.COMPETING INTEREST STATEMENTAll authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: ALM and ME report grants from government partners to the Behavioural Insights Team, during the conduct of the study, JW reports grants from Cancer Research UK, during the conduct of the study; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years, no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.TRANSPARENCY DECLARATIONThe authors affirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as originally planned have been explained.AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION STATEMENTThe study was conceptualised by LS, GJR, JW and TMM. AM and ME completed data collection. LS analysed the data. All authors contributed to, and approved, the final manuscript.WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPICDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple countries, including the UK, have introduced “lockdown” measures.The World Health Organization has warned against using the results of antibody tests to issue “immunity passports” due to fears that those who test positive for antibodies may stop adhering to protective measures.There is no research investigating adherence to protective measures among those who think they have had COVID-19.WHAT THIS STUDY ADDSThis is the first study investigating behavioural differences between those who think they have had COVID-19 and those who do not.About twice as many people think they have had COVID-19 than prevalence estimates suggest.Results suggest that there may be a high degree of self-misdiagnosis within those who think they have had COVID-19.Those who think they have had COVID-19 were more likely to think they were immune to COVID-19, and less likely to adhere to social distancing measures.

scholarly journals Ethnic and minority group differences in engagement with COVID-19 vaccination programmes – at Pandemic Pace; when vaccine confidence in mass rollout meets local vaccine hesitancy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Reid ◽  
Mzwandile A. Mabhala
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Ethnic Minorities ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Reproductive Age ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Vaccine Confidence ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Roll Out

AbstractIsrael, the UK, the USA, and some other wealthier countries lead in the implementation of COVID-19 vaccine mass vaccination programmes. Evidence from these countries indicates that their ethnic minorities could be as disproportionately disadvantaged in COVID-19 vaccines roll-out as they were affected by COVID-19-related serious illnesses. Their disadvantage is linked to their lower social status and fewer social goods compared with dominant population groups.Albeit limited by methodology, early studies attribute lower uptake of COVID-19 amongst ethnic minorities to the wider determinants of vaccine uptake, hesitancy or lack of vaccine confidence, including lower levels of trust and greater concerns about vaccine safety. Early sentinel studies are needed in all early adopter countries.One emerging theme among those of reproductive age in minority communities concerns a worry regarding COVID-19 vaccine’s potential adverse effect on fertility. Respected professional groups reassure this is not a credible rationale. Drug and vaccine regulators use understandable, cautious and conditional language in emergency licencing of new gene-based vaccines. Technical assessments on whether there is any potential genotoxicity or reproductive toxicity should be more emphatic.From a public health perspective, sentinel studies should identify such community concerns and act early to produce convincing explanations and evidence. Local public health workforces need to be diverse, multiskilled, and able to engage well with minorities and vulnerable groups. The local Directors of Public Health in the UK are based in each local government area and have a remit and opportunity to stimulate speedy action to increase vaccine uptake.During the rapid Pandemic Pace of the vaccines roll-out, extra efforts to minimise uptake variations are likely to achieve improvements in the next year or two. We expect variations will not disappear however, given that underlying inequalities persist in less inclusive social systems.

Understanding Questions and Concerns Regarding COVID-19 and the COVID-19 Vaccine Among Populations Presenting at a COVID-19 Vaccine Clinic Hub (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hari Krishnakumar ◽  
Taylor Holland ◽  
Monica Martinez ◽  
Lucas Hendrix ◽  
Michael Collins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
General Health ◽  
Healthy Lifestyle ◽  
Severity Of Illness ◽  
Vaccine Safety ◽  
Vaccine Uptake ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
School Of Nursing ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Health Messaging

BACKGROUND Skepticism among the public surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine is still prevalent despite vaccine-positive communication and many Americans having already received the vaccine. Side effects of the vaccine as well as its expeditious research and development are among the top concerns among those hesitant to receive the coronavirus vaccine. Moreover, there is additional concern regarding correlation between comorbidities and severity of illness due to the coronavirus pandemic. OBJECTIVE To address these areas of concern, we examined the concerns and questions that attendees of the vaccine clinic hub had about the pandemic and the vaccine with the goal of reducing misconceptions and vaccine hesitancy. A secondary aim of the study was to provide public health messaging in the form of an educational video to address the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle during the pandemic. METHODS An electronic survey accessible via a QR code on printed flyers was distributed throughout the waiting areas and observation rooms within the COVID-19 vaccine clinic at UT Health San Antonio School of Nursing from April 5-16, 2021. The survey contained questions designed to obtain information on concerns of the clinic attendees, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and COVID-19 vaccine, as well as concerns about their lifestyle and difficulties with chronic health conditions during the pandemic. The data sets were analyzed qualitatively during this two-week period. RESULTS Out of 510 attendees, 277 attendees had provided 280 responses to the first question about the vaccine and life after they had received the vaccine. Six areas of interest were identified: immunity, future vaccinations, vaccine symptoms, protocol post-vaccination, vaccine safety, and child vaccinations. Regarding the responses collecting attendees’ concerns regarding their general health or health related concerns, several inquiries were identified surrounding the following health problems: diabetes, hypertension, mental health, sedentary lifestyle, and others that constituted a smaller percentage of questions. CONCLUSIONS This study provides a novel perspective on understanding questions and concerns regarding COVID-19, the COVID-19 vaccine, and general health within a vaccinated population. Attendees of the vaccine clinic hub were found to still have questions even after they had received their vaccine, suggesting that eliminating uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine is not necessary to motivate individuals to receive the vaccine. Instead, addressing concerns through public health messaging can increase vaccine uptake and promote healthy living.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document