Perception And Adherence To The COVID-19 Vaccination Programme Amongst Health Workers In A General Surgical Department: A Single Centre Experience
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Abstract:
Background: Healthcare workers are often viewed as role models for health decisions so their perception of the COVID-19 vaccination programme is likely to have a significant impact on the general population. The aim of this study is to assess the knowledge and perceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine amongst health workers and the adherence to the same.
Methods: 157 participants completed the questionnaire. 100\% were aware of the COVID-19 vaccination. Methods by which staff heard about the COVID-19 vaccine included; scientific fora (38.1\%); government sensitisation material (32.9\%); word of mouth (23.2\%); social media (15.5\%) or ‘Other’ (16.1\%).
Only 63.6\% of the sample were able to correctly identify that the vaccine was an mRNA vaccine and 67.3\% correctly identified that the vaccine offered between 51-100\% protection.
82.7\% of respondents had been vaccinated with 64.1\% having received two doses. Reasons for remaining unvaccinated included; ‘allergy’ (37.0\%); ‘difficulty accessing’ (25.9\%); ‘personal reasons’ (11.1\%) and ‘uncertainty about side effects’ (3.7\%). 3 participants were unvaccinated due to other clinical contraindications.
63.5\% agreed that the vaccine roll out had boosted their confidence in delivering patient care.
Conclusion: Overall, perception of and adherence to the COVID-19 vaccination programme is good. However, there were notable gaps in staff knowledge and addressing these via organisational education initiatives could help improve compliance amongst staff and in turn the wider community.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access journal, which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is under the BOAI definition of open access.
The journal is adopting the Creative Commons International Attribution 4. CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0CC BY-NC 4.0]
You are free to:
- Share— copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt— remix, transform, and build upon the material
- for any purpose
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
-
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes .
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
References
COVID-19 Worldometer. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Mutambudzi M, Niedzwiedz C, Macdonald EB, et al Occupation and risk of severe COVID-19: prospective cohort study of 120 075 UK Biobank participants. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2021;78:307-314.
BMJ 2020;369:m1591 doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1591 (Published 21 April 2020)
Coronavirus in the UK. https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk
NHS test and trace statistics (England): 28 May to June2020.www.gov.uk/government/statistics/nhs-test-and-trace-statistics-england-28-may-to-3-june-2020
Compliance with vaccination schedules Adamos Hadjipanayis Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2019; 15(4): 1003–1004. Published online 2019 Jan 16. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1556078
Heren K. UK contact tracers could deal with just five people a week before scheme was dropped in March. Evening Standard. 31 May 2020. www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-contact-tracersfive-week-a4455536.html.
The UK was a global leader in preparing for pandemics. What went wrong with coronavirus? Clare Wenham Fri 1 May 2020 14.13 BST
BMJ 2020;369:m2471
Knowledge and Perceptions of COVID-19 Among the General Public in the United States and the United Kingdom: A Cross-sectional Online Survey Pascal Geldsetzer https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-0912
Intention to receive vaccine against COVID-19 and associated factors among health professionals working at public hospitals in resource limited settings Mohammedjud Hassen Ahmed Shuma Gosha Kanfe, Mohammedamin Hajure Jarso doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254391
Murphy, J. et al. (2021), “Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom”, NATURE COMMUNICATIONS, Vol. 12/29, pp. 12-29, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20226-
Branswell, Helen. “New Data from China Buttress Fears About High Coronavirus Fatality Rate, WHO Expert Says.STAT. 25 February 2020
Pappa S, Ntella V, Giannakas T, Giannakoulis VG, Papoutsi E, Katsaounou P. Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain Behav Immun. (2020) 88:901–7. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3594632
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Drapeau A, Marchand A, Beaulieu-Prévost D. Epidemiology of psychological distress. In: LAbate L, editor. Mental Illnesses: Understanding, Prediction and Control. London: IntechOpen (2012). doi: 10.5772/30872
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Germani F, Biller-Andorno N (2021) The anti-vaccination infodemic on social media: A behavioral analysis. PLoS ONE 16(3): e0247642. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0247642