What Demographic, Social, and Contextual Factors Influence the Intention to Use COVID-19 Vaccines: A Scoping Review

Background: During the COVID-19 crisis, an apparent growth in vaccine hesitancy has been noticed due to different factors and reasons. Therefore, this scoping review was performed to determine the prevalence of intention to use COVID-19 vaccines among adults aged 18–60, and to identify the demographic, social, and contextual factors that influence the intention to use COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: This scoping review was conducted by using the methodological framework for scoping review outlined by Arksey and O’Malley. A search strategy was carried out on four electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. All peer-reviewed articles published between November 2019 and December 2020 were reviewed. Data were extracted to identify the prevalence of, and factors that influence, the intention to use COVID-19 vaccines. Results: A total of 48 relevant articles were identified for inclusion in the review. Outcomes presented fell into seven themes: demographics, social factors, vaccination beliefs and attitudes, vaccine-related perceptions, health-related perceptions, perceived barriers, and vaccine recommendations. Age, gender, education level, race/ethnicity, vaccine safety and effectiveness, influenza vaccination history, and self-protection from COVID-19 were the most prominent factors associated with intention to use COVID-19 vaccines. Furthermore, the majority of studies (n = 34/48) reported a relatively high prevalence of intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19, with a range from 60% to 93%. Conclusion: This scoping review enables the creation of demographic, social, and contextual constructs associated with intention to vaccinate among the adult population. These factors are likely to play a major role in any targeted vaccination programs, particularly COVID-19 vaccination. Thus, our review suggests focusing on the development of strategies to promote the intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19 and to overcome vaccine hesitancy and refusal. These strategies could include transparent communication, social media engagement, and the initiation of education programs.

Download Full-text

Research Trends on Mobile Mental Health Application for General Population: A Scoping Review

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph18052459 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (5) ◽

pp. 2459

Author(s):

Won Ju Hwang ◽

Ji Sun Ha ◽

Mi Jeong Kim

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Mobile Apps ◽

Rapid Development ◽

Adult Population ◽

Well Being ◽

Stress Theory ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

General Adult Population ◽

Health Related

Background: Scoping reviews of the literature on the development and application of mental health apps based on theoretical suggestions are lacking. This study systematically examines studies on the effects and results of mental health mobile apps for the general adult population. Methods: Following PICOs (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, study design), a general form of scoping review was adopted. From January 2010 to December 2019, we selected the effects of mental health-related apps and intervention programs provided by mobile to the general adult population over the age of 18. Additionally, evaluation of methodological quality was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist. Results: Fourteen studies were analyzed of 1205 that were identified; duplicate and matching studies were excluded. One was a descriptive study and 13 were experimental, of which randomized control trials (RCTs) accounted for 71.4%. Four of the mobile apps were developed based on cognitive behavior theory, one based on stress theory, and one on ecological instant intervention theory. These apps included breathing training, meditation, and music therapy. Stress, depression, and anxiety decreased using these apps, and some were effective for well-being. Conclusion: With the rapid development of technology related to mental health, many mobile apps are developed, but apps based on theoretical knowledge and well-designed research are lacking. Further research and practices should be conducted to develop, test, and disseminate evidence-based mHealth for mental health promotion. RCT studies are needed to expand the application to mental health services to various populations.

Download Full-text

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Cross-Sectional Study on a Mexican Population Using an Online Questionnaire (COV-AHQ)

Frontiers in Public Health ◽

10.3389/fpubh.2021.728690 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 ◽

Author(s):

Juan Luis Delgado-Gallegos ◽

Gerardo R. Padilla-Rivas ◽

Erika Zúñiga-Violante ◽

Gener Avilés-Rodríguez ◽

Daniel Arellanos-Soto ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Effects ◽

Economic Status ◽

Adult Population ◽

Statistical Correlation ◽

Mexican Population ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Online Questionnaire ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Vaccination Programs ◽

Depth Analysis

Mexico has become one of the most highly affected countries by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Latin America. Therefore, efficient vaccination programs are needed to address COVID-19 pandemic. Although recent advances around the world have made it possible to develop vaccines in record time, there has been increasing fear and misinformation around the vaccines. Hence, understanding vaccine hesitancy is imperative for modeling successful vaccination strategies. In this study, we analyzed the attitude and perceptions toward COVID-19 vaccination, in a Mexican population (n = 1,512), using the proposed COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy Questionnaire (COV-AHQ) (Cronbach's alpha > 0.8), which evaluates a mild perception of danger and contamination with respect to COVID-19, a moderate perception of xenophobia generated throughout COVID-19 quarantine, fear of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination, and hesitancy of parent toward vaccination of children; furthermore, a section including sociodemographic variables was included. According to the results of this study, the statistical correlation analysis of the general vaccination posture seems to correlate significantly (p < 0.05) with a mild perception of danger and contamination with respect to COVID-19, a moderate perception of xenophobia generated throughout COVID-19 quarantine, hesitancy of parent toward vaccination of children, willingness to get COVID-19 vaccine, previous influenza vaccination, perception of the vaccine that could help the economy of country, occupation, gender, age, and participants actively researching COVID-19 vaccine information. An in-depth analysis assisted by binary logistic regression concluded that the young adult population around ages 18–34 years are the most likely to get vaccinated. This posture seems to be highly influenced by a mild perception of danger and contamination with respect to COVID-19, a moderate perception of xenophobia generated throughout COVID-19 quarantine, fear of adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccination, and hesitancy of parents toward vaccination of children. While their own personal religious beliefs and economic status, the level of education does not seem to have an effect on the willingness to get vaccinated neither did having a previous COVID-19 diagnosis or even knowing someone with a positive COVID-19 diagnosis. Health authorities and policymakers could use the results of this study to aid in modeling vaccination programs and strategies and identify population groups with high vaccine hesitancy prevalence and assess significant public health issues.

Download Full-text

Vaccination perception and coverage among healthcare students in France in 2019

BMC Medical Education ◽

10.1186/s12909-020-02426-5 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Aurélie Baldolli ◽

Jocelyn Michon ◽

Renaud Verdon ◽

Anna Fournier

Keyword(s):

Vaccine Safety ◽

Health Sciences ◽

Vaccination Schedule ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Attitudes And Beliefs ◽

Vaccination Programs ◽

Healthcare Students ◽

Flu Vaccination ◽

Health Sciences Students ◽

Risk Balance

Abstract Background Vaccine hesitancy in healthcare workers has been increasing especially in France while they are the cornerstone of vaccination programs. Greater understanding of healthcare students (HCS) vaccine knowledge, attitudes and beliefs is necessary to provide an adequate vaccination education to better equip them to promote vaccination in their future careers. The aim of this study was to assess vaccination perception (VP) (perception of benefits and risks of vaccines) and its impact on vaccination coverage (VC) for mandatory and recommended vaccines among HCS. Methods A standardized, anonymous self-reporting electronic questionnaire was prospectively sent to HCS (medicine, nursing, pharmacy, midwifery, physiotherapy students and 1st year of health sciences students) of Normandy University in France between 18/03/2019 and 8/04/2019. VP was evaluated with questions regarding vaccination hesitancy, safety of vaccine and the benefit/risk balance of vaccination. Global VC (GVC) was defined as being vaccinated according to the mandatory and/or recommended vaccination schedule by national French law in 2018. Results 542 HCS took part in this survey. VC was high for mandatory (diphtheriae, poliomyelitis, tetanus 93.5%, hepatitis B virus 88.6%) and even most of recommended vaccinations (measles 95%, pertussis 88.2%). Global VC (40.4%) was not statistically different between HCS except for 1st year health sciences students who were less vaccinated (25.6%). Regarding VP, 97.8% of HCS thought that vaccine are effective. When vaccine safety and level of vaccine hesitancy were assessed (on a 0–10 scale, 0: not safe or not hesitant and 10: completely safe and strongly hesitant for vaccine), 91% of respondents stated that vaccine safety is ≥7 and in 80% the vaccine hesitancy was < 3. There was no difference among student categories. 80.6% of HCS recommended all vaccines but only 52% agreed that flu vaccination should be mandatory for HCS. In the multivariate analysis, being a 1st year health care sciences student was associated with a lower GVC (OR 95% CI = 2 [1.2–3.3], p = 0.004) than being a medical student. Conclusion HCS perceived vaccine as effective and secure. Despite the good perception of vaccines, less than half HCS are well vaccinated.

Download Full-text

A Scoping Review to Find Out Worldwide COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Its Underlying Determinants

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines9111243 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (11) ◽

pp. 1243

Author(s):

Md. Rafiul Biswas ◽

Mahmood Saleh Alzubaidi ◽

Uzair Shah ◽

Alaa A. Abd-Alrazaq ◽

Zubair Shah

Keyword(s):

Scoping Review ◽

Vaccine Efficacy ◽

Vaccine Safety ◽

Vaccine Uptake ◽

World Health ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Current Crisis ◽

Scoping Reviews ◽

Health Organization ◽

Context Specific

Background: The current crisis created by the coronavirus pandemic is impacting all facets of life. Coronavirus vaccines have been developed to prevent coronavirus infection and fight the pandemic. Since vaccines might be the only way to prevent and stop the spread of coronavirus. The World Health Organization (WHO) has already approved several vaccines, and many countries have started vaccinating people. Misperceptions about vaccines persist despite the evidence of vaccine safety and efficacy. Objectives: To explore the scientific literature and find the determinants for worldwide COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy as reported in the literature. Methods: PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were followed to conduct a scoping review of literature on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and willingness to vaccinate. Several databases (e.g., MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar) were searched to find relevant articles. Intervention- (i.e., COVID-19 vaccine) and outcome- (i.e., hesitancy) related terms were used to search in these databases. The search was conducted on 22 February 2021. Both forward and backward reference lists were checked to find further studies. Three reviewers worked independently to select articles and extract data from selected literature. Studies that used a quantitative survey to measure COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and acceptance were included in this review. The extracted data were synthesized following the narrative approach and results were represented graphically with appropriate figures and tables. Results: 82 studies were included in this scoping review of 882 identified from our search. Sometimes, several studies had been performed in the same country, and it was observed that vaccine hesitancy was high earlier and decreased over time with the hope of vaccine efficacy. People in different countries had varying percentages of vaccine uptake (28–86.1%), vaccine hesitancy (10–57.8%), vaccine refusal (0–24%). The most common determinants affecting vaccination intention include vaccine efficacy, vaccine side effects, mistrust in healthcare, religious beliefs, and trust in information sources. Additionally, vaccination intentions are influenced by demographic factors such as age, gender, education, and region. Conclusions: The underlying factors of vaccine hesitancy are complex and context-specific, varying across time and socio-demographic variables. Vaccine hesitancy can also be influenced by other factors such as health inequalities, socioeconomic disadvantages, systemic racism, and level of exposure to misinformation online, with some factors being more dominant in certain countries than others. Therefore, strategies tailored to cultures and socio-psychological factors need to be developed to reduce vaccine hesitancy and aid informed decision-making.

Download Full-text

Patient Work and Their Contexts: Scoping Review (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.16656 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Kathleen Yin ◽

Joshua Jung ◽

Enrico Coiera ◽

Liliana Laranjo ◽

Ann Blandford ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Scoping Review ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Internal State ◽

Contextual Factors ◽

Organizational Factors ◽

Adult Patients ◽

Health Conditions ◽

Original Research ◽

Health Related ◽

Patient Work

BACKGROUND Having patients self-manage their health conditions is a widely promoted concept, but many patients struggle to practice it effectively. Moreover, few studies have analyzed the nature of work required from patients and how such work fits into the context of their daily life. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to review the characteristics of patient work in adult patients. Patient work refers to tasks that health conditions impose on patients (eg, taking medications) within a system of contextual factors. METHODS A systematic scoping review was conducted using narrative synthesis. Data were extracted from PubMed, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and PsycINFO, including studies from August 2013 to August 2018. The included studies focused on adult patients and assessed one or more of the following: (1) physical health–related tasks, (2) cognitive health–related tasks, or (3) contextual factors affecting these tasks. Tasks were categorized according to the themes that emerged: (1) if the task is always visible to others or can be cognitive, (2) if the task must be conducted collaboratively or can be conducted alone, and (3) if the task was done with the purpose of creating resources. Contextual factors were grouped according to the level at which they exert influence (micro, meso, or macro) and where they fit in the patient work system (the macroergonomic layer of physical, social, and organizational factors; the mesoergonomic layer of household and community; and the microergonomic triad of person-task-tools). RESULTS In total, 67 publications were included, with 58 original research articles and 9 review articles. A variety of patient work tasks were observed, ranging from physical and tangible tasks (such as taking medications and visiting health care professionals) to psychological and social tasks (such as creating coping strategies). Patient work was affected by a range of contextual factors on the micro, meso, or macro levels. Our results indicate that most patient work was done alone, in private, and often imposing cognitive burden with low amounts of support. CONCLUSIONS This review sought to provide insight into the work burden of health management from a patient perspective and how patient context influences such work. For many patients, health-related work is ever present, invisible, and overwhelming. When researchers and clinicians design and implement patient-facing interventions, it is important to understand how the extra work impacts one’s internal state and coping strategy, how such work fits into daily routines, and if these changes could be maintained in the long term.

Download Full-text

COVID-19 vaccination intentions amongst care-professionals in the field of intellectual disability: a scoping review

10.31234/osf.io/zn2xp ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

L.D. Willems ◽

Vernandi Dyzel ◽

Paula Sterkenburg

Keyword(s):

Intellectual Disabilities ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Assisted Living ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Vaccine Safety ◽

Vaccine Uptake ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Accurate Information ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

People With Intellectual Disabilities

Background: A worldwide vaccination program is the chosen strategy against the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy however, forms a threat because vaccine uptake is voluntary in most countries. Care-professionals of people with intellectual disabilities are exposed to greater risks than other healthcare workers due to the vulnerable group they attend to and the assisted-living facilities in which they often work. Little is still known of the reasons for vaccine hesitancy in this specific group in contrast to those of other healthcare workers. Objective: To provide insight in the intentions and attitudes on COVID-vaccination of healthcare workers, including those who care for people with intellectual disabilities, by means of a scoping review. Methods: The databases that were searched for papers are CINAHL, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Web of Science, Semantic Scolar, Prospero, Outbreak Science, Cochrane and Scopus. The search was broadened to healthcare workers in general because only two papers were found on those caring for people with intellectual disabilities. A total of 26 papers were identified concerning the vaccine intentions of 43,199 healthcare workers worldwide. Data were gathered both quantitively and qualitatively. The papers were analysed for all themes regarding vaccine willingness and vaccine hesitancy.Results: The themes that came to light included: percentages of vaccine willingness, predictors of willingness differentiated by 11 sub-themes (mainly profession, age, gender and past vaccine behaviour), attitudes of willingness and hesitancy differentiated by 19 sub-themes (perceived COVID treat and protecting others for willingness, concerns on vaccine safety and efficacy for hesitancy), sources of vaccination information, contextual factors and changes in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance over time and finally, future strategies for interventions. Conclusions: There was overlap in the percentages of vaccination, predictors of vaccine willingness and the attitudes of vaccine willingness and hesitancy between healthcare workers and those caring for people with intellectual disabilities. Vaccine safety and efficacy are the most prominent concerns with regard to vaccine hesitancy. Therefore, future strategies for interventions should address vaccine safety and efficacy. Furthermore, interventions are recommended to be interactive in order to facilitate exchange. Discussion groups that are able to address specific concerns and personal experiences, show to be effective in addressing vaccine hesitancy. Accurate information can also be made more accessible to target groups by promoting videos on social media platforms. Hence, further research is necessary to specify more precisely the attitudes of healthcare workers caring for people with intellectual disabilities and in more countries worldwide.

Download Full-text

Vaccine Hesitancy in China: A Qualitative Study of Stakeholders’ Perspectives

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines8040650 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (4) ◽

pp. 650 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ronghui Yang ◽

Bart Penders ◽

Klasien Horstman

Keyword(s):

Qualitative Study ◽

Public Discourse ◽

Vaccine Safety ◽

Vaccination Rate ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Online Data ◽

Vaccination Programs ◽

Institutional Management ◽

Chinese Parents ◽

Depth Interviews

A series of vaccine incidents have stimulated vaccine hesitance in China over the last decade. Many scholars have studied the institutional management of these incidents, but a qualitative study of stakeholders’ perspectives on vaccine hesitancy in China is missing. To address this lacuna, we conducted in-depth interviews and collected online data to explore diverse stakeholders’ narratives on vaccine hesitance. Our analysis shows the different perspectives of medical experts, journalists, parents, and self-defined vaccination victims on vaccination and vaccination hesitance. Medical experts generally consider vaccines, despite some flaws, as safe, and they consider most vaccine safety incidents to be related to coupling symptoms, not to vaccinations. Some parents agree with medical experts, but most do not trust vaccine safety and do not want to put their children at risk. Media professionals, online medical experts, and doctors who do not need to align with the political goal of maintaining a high vaccination rate are less positive about vaccination and consider vaccine hesitance a failure of expert–lay communication in China. Our analysis exhibits the tensions of medical expert and lay perspectives on vaccine hesitance, and suggests that vaccination experts ‘see like a state’, which is a finding consistent with other studies that have identified the over-politicization of expert–lay communication in Chinese public discourse. Chinese parents need space to express their concerns so that vaccination programs can attune to them.

Download Full-text

Patient Work and Their Contexts: Scoping Review

Journal of Medical Internet Research ◽

10.2196/16656 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (6) ◽

pp. e16656 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kathleen Yin ◽

Joshua Jung ◽

Enrico Coiera ◽

Liliana Laranjo ◽

Ann Blandford ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Scoping Review ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Internal State ◽

Contextual Factors ◽

Organizational Factors ◽

Adult Patients ◽

Health Conditions ◽

Original Research ◽

Health Related ◽

Patient Work

Background Having patients self-manage their health conditions is a widely promoted concept, but many patients struggle to practice it effectively. Moreover, few studies have analyzed the nature of work required from patients and how such work fits into the context of their daily life. Objective This study aimed to review the characteristics of patient work in adult patients. Patient work refers to tasks that health conditions impose on patients (eg, taking medications) within a system of contextual factors. Methods A systematic scoping review was conducted using narrative synthesis. Data were extracted from PubMed, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and PsycINFO, including studies from August 2013 to August 2018. The included studies focused on adult patients and assessed one or more of the following: (1) physical health–related tasks, (2) cognitive health–related tasks, or (3) contextual factors affecting these tasks. Tasks were categorized according to the themes that emerged: (1) if the task is always visible to others or can be cognitive, (2) if the task must be conducted collaboratively or can be conducted alone, and (3) if the task was done with the purpose of creating resources. Contextual factors were grouped according to the level at which they exert influence (micro, meso, or macro) and where they fit in the patient work system (the macroergonomic layer of physical, social, and organizational factors; the mesoergonomic layer of household and community; and the microergonomic triad of person-task-tools). Results In total, 67 publications were included, with 58 original research articles and 9 review articles. A variety of patient work tasks were observed, ranging from physical and tangible tasks (such as taking medications and visiting health care professionals) to psychological and social tasks (such as creating coping strategies). Patient work was affected by a range of contextual factors on the micro, meso, or macro levels. Our results indicate that most patient work was done alone, in private, and often imposing cognitive burden with low amounts of support. Conclusions This review sought to provide insight into the work burden of health management from a patient perspective and how patient context influences such work. For many patients, health-related work is ever present, invisible, and overwhelming. When researchers and clinicians design and implement patient-facing interventions, it is important to understand how the extra work impacts one’s internal state and coping strategy, how such work fits into daily routines, and if these changes could be maintained in the long term.

Download Full-text

Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in China: A Scoping Review of Chinese Scholarship

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines8010002 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 2 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Ronghui Yang ◽

Bart Penders ◽

Klasien Horstman

Keyword(s):

Scoping Review ◽

Chinese Literature ◽

Vaccine Safety ◽

Relevant Information ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Parental Concerns ◽

Chinese Studies ◽

National Immunization ◽

Parental Belief ◽

Vaccination Hesitancy

Despite the well-developed Chinese National Immunization Program, vaccine hesitancy in China is rising. As part of the response, Chinese scholars have studied determinants and proposed solutions to vaccination hesitancy. We performed a scoping review of Chinese literature (2007–2019), drawn from four Chinese databases. We mapped relevant information and presented a systemic account of the proposed determinants and responses to vaccine hesitancy in China. We identified 77 relevant studies that reveal four approaches to vaccine hesitancy. Most Chinese studies define vaccine hesitancy as a problem of vaccine safety and vaccine incident response and place accountability on the level of governance, such as regulation deficits and inappropriate crisis management. A first minority of studies tied vaccination hesitancy to unprofessional medical conduct and called for additional resources and enhanced physician qualifications. A second minority of studies positioned vaccination hesitancy as a problem of parental belief and pointed to the role of media, proposing enhanced communication and education. Chinese literature ties vaccine hesitancy primarily to vaccine safety and medical conduct. Compared to international research, parental concerns are underrepresented. The Chinese context of vaccination scandals notably frames the discussion of vaccination hesitancy and potential solutions, which stresses the importance of considering vaccination hesitancy in specific social and political contexts.

Download Full-text

Healthcare Providers’ Vaccine Perceptions, Hesitancy, and Recommendation to Patients: A Systematic Review

Vaccines ◽

10.3390/vaccines9070713 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (7) ◽

pp. 713

Author(s):

Cheryl Lin ◽

Jewel Mullen ◽

Danielle Smith ◽

Michaela Kotarba ◽

Samantha J. Kaplan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Disease Risk ◽

Healthcare Providers ◽

Vaccine Safety ◽

Survey Study ◽

Vaccine Hesitancy ◽

Attitudes And Practices ◽

Inadequate Knowledge ◽

Vaccine Confidence ◽

And Behavior ◽

Demographic Impact

Despite vaccines’ effectiveness in reducing the rate of preventable diseases, vaccine hesitancy has threatened public health and economies worldwide. Healthcare providers’ (HCP) communications and behavior strongly influence patient receptivity and uptake. The goal of this review was to examine HCP vaccine perceptions, knowledge, and reservations and how these attitudes affect their recommendations and vaccination practices. Primary research studies published by 16 September 2020 were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. A 14-item scale was developed for survey study and risk of bias appraisal (SSRBA). In total, 96 papers from 34 countries were included, covering 17 vaccines (HPV and influenza vaccines the most studied). Recommendation was positively associated with provider knowledge and experience, beliefs about disease risk, and perceptions of vaccine safety, necessity, and efficacy. HCP vaccination attitudes and practices varied across specialties, vaccines, and countries; demographic impact was inconclusive. Barriers included anticipation of patient/parental concerns or refusal, lacking clear guidelines, time constraints, and cost. For HPV, vaccines were more often recommended to older, female adolescents and by physicians who discussed sexual health. HCPs are vital advocates for patients and the public, but studies indicated a prevalence of provider hesitancy pertaining to inadequate knowledge, low vaccine confidence, and suboptimal uptake themselves. Improving HCP knowledge and assuring their access to information they deem trustworthy are essential to supporting HCPs‘ role as “trusted messengers” to promote vaccine acceptance.

Download Full-text