Dataset Information

Endorsement of alternative medicine and vaccine hesitancy among physicians: A cross-sectional study in four European countries.

ABSTRACT: Vaccine hesitancy has become a threat to public health, especially as it is a phenomenon that has also been observed among healthcare professionals. In this study, we analyzed the relationship between endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and vaccination attitudes and behaviors among healthcare professionals, using a cross-sectional sample of physicians with vaccination responsibilities from four European countries: Germany, Finland, Portugal, and France (total N = 2,787). Our results suggest that, in all the participating countries, CAM endorsement is associated with lower frequency of vaccine recommendation, lower self-vaccination rates, and being more open to patients delaying vaccination, with these relationships being mediated by distrust in vaccines. A latent profile analysis revealed that a profile characterized by higher-than-average CAM endorsement and lower-than-average confidence and recommendation of vaccines occurs, to some degree, among 19% of the total sample, although these percentages varied from one country to another: 23.72% in Germany, 17.83% in France, 9.77% in Finland, and 5.86% in Portugal. These results constitute a call to consider health care professionals' attitudes toward CAM as a factor that could hinder the implementation of immunization campaigns.

SUBMITTER: Fasce A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10431744 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Endorsement of alternative medicine and vaccine hesitancy among physicians: A cross-sectional study in four European countries.

Fasce Angelo A Karlsson Linda L Verger Pierre P Mäki Otto O Taubert Frederike F Garrison Amanda A Schmid Philipp P Holford Dawn Liu DL Lewandowsky Stephan S Rodrigues Fernanda F Betsch Cornelia C Soveri Anna A

Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 20230801 2

Vaccine hesitancy has become a threat to public health, especially as it is a phenomenon that has also been observed among healthcare professionals. In this study, we analyzed the relationship between endorsement of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and vaccination attitudes and behaviors among healthcare professionals, using a cross-sectional sample of physicians with vaccination responsibilities from four European countries: Germany, Finland, Portugal, and France (total <i>N</i> = 2 ...[more]

PMID: 37581343

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe reduction of antimicrobial usage (AMU) is in the focus in modern pig production. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of alternatives to reduce AMU at herd level. In a prospective study, 68 farrow-to-finish pig herds located in Belgium, France, Germany and Sweden were recruited on a voluntary basis to implement tailor-made intervention plans to reduce their AMU. Alternative measures included improvement of biosecurity (n = 29 herds), vaccination (n = 30), changes of feeding schemes or drinking water quality (n = 45), improved pig health and welfare care (n = 21) as well as changes in stable climate and zootechnical measures (n = 14). Herds were followed for 1 year after implementation of measures. Annual antimicrobial expenditures or treatment records, as well as disease incidence scores were collected and compared to those of the year before intervention. AMU was measured as the treatment incidence and calculated by age category, antimicrobial class and administration route.ResultsCompliance with the intervention plans was high (median 93%). AMU was significantly reduced following the implementation of alternative measures: in the median herd of the four countries, pigs were treated before intervention 25% of their expected lifespan (200 days from birth to slaughter) and after intervention 16%. AMU of suckling and weaned pigs were significantly reduced by 37 and 54%, respectively. The usage of polymyxins and tetracyclines was significantly reduced by 69 and 49%, respectively. AMU via feed and water, as well as parenteral AMU were significantly reduced by 46 and 36%, respectively. Herds with a higher AMU level before intervention achieved a bigger reduction. The majority of disease incidence were similar before and after intervention, with a few exceptions of disorders related to the gastro-intestinal tract in suckling pigs (decreased) and in breeding pigs (increased).ConclusionFollowing tailor-made implementation of alternative measures, a substantial reduction of AMU in pig production was achievable without jeopardizing animal health. The AMU reduction in the youngest age categories (suckling and weaned pigs) and the reduction of group treatments via feed and water was in line with the recent European Guidelines on the prudent use of antimicrobials in veterinary medicine.

Project description:BackgroundWe explored vaccine motivation and preferences for tick-borne encephalitis (TBE) vaccine attributes among participants in TBE-endemic countries in Europe.MethodsAn online survey was conducted among the general public in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden. Participants were ≥ 18 years old, open to receiving vaccines, and living in, or regularly traveling to, TBE-endemic regions in the aforementioned countries. Participants were asked about their general vaccine knowledge and motivations for vaccination, before rating the importance of TBE vaccine attributes, such as efficacy, safety, dosing schedule, and booster interval. Thereafter, participants were shown three hypothetical TBE vaccine profiles with different combinations of attributes. Assuming equal efficacy and safety, participants were asked to select their preferred profile from 12 screens as part of a discrete-choice conjoint analysis. Utility scores were calculated to show the importance of each attribute. Data are presented for the overall survey group and by age and gender, using t-tests to compare means.ResultsFor 73% of participants (n = 1003/1379), self-protection was among the top three reasons to get vaccinated. Disease severity, protection of children or family, and advice or recommendation from a doctor/healthcare professional (HCP) were top three reasons for over half of participants. The majority (58-69%) agreed or strongly agreed that they trust their doctor/HCP on the subject of vaccines, they rely on their doctor/HCP's vaccine knowledge, and they prefer their doctor/HCP to make recommendations on which vaccines they or their families should take. Efficacy and safety were the most important standalone TBE vaccine attributes; however, among TBE vaccine profiles including 3-, 5- and 10-year booster intervals, the 10-year booster interval was the most influential attribute level when choosing a preferred vaccine profile (utility score: 0.58 [standard error: 0.01]). Differences in motivators and preferences were observed between age and gender subgroups.ConclusionThe high level of doctor/HCP reliance highlights the key role doctors/HCPs play in influencing vaccine decision-making. Booster interval was the biggest driver of choice when selecting a hypothetical TBE vaccine profile, with the strongest preference for a 10-year booster interval. These findings could be used to inform TBE vaccination recommendations and in the further development of TBE vaccines.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aims to identify the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy, willingness and its variation over time in order to inform more responsive strategies for increasing vaccination uptake. The specific objectives are: (1) to describe and compare levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among the general population in rural and urban settings in West Africa over time and (2) to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination willingness and hesitancy among the general population across five West African countries over time.DesignFollowing a baseline survey (Wave I), three serial cross-sectional surveys (Waves II-IV) were implemented.SettingThe study was conducted in Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali, Senegal and Sierra Leone from November 2021 to July 2022.ParticipantsA total of 13 571 study participants were included in the study (n=4373, n=4593 and n=4605 for survey Waves II, III and IV, respectively). Inclusion criteria were being 18 years or older, living in the study area and willing to provide informed consent. A two-stage sampling strategy was used to select the sample from among the general population.Primary and secondary outcomesPrimary outcomes were the variability of vaccine hesitancy over time and across the five West African countries. Secondary outcomes were factors associated with vaccine willingness.ResultsA small but steady increase in hesitancy to COVID-19-vaccination can be observed across countries, with an upward trend of vaccine hesitancy reported by 952 participants (33.9 %) in Wave II, 1055 (37.3%) in Wave III and 1089 (38.1%) in Wave IV. Among the countries included, Senegal shows the highest level of vaccine hesitancy ('Definitely no' and 'Probably no' ranging from 50.2% to 56.0% and 26.2 to 28.3%, respectively). At the same time, Senegal has the lowest vaccination coverage overall. Across all five countries and survey waves, the primary factor associated with vaccination willingness is fear of experiencing severe COVID-19 disease (Wave II: OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.51, Wave III: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59 and Wave IV: OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.66). Perceived improved financial status seems to influence willingness to get vaccinated negatively (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.81) and unlike in Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich and Democratic countries, men seem more reluctant to get vaccinated than women (OR 0.77, 95%, CI 0.65 to 0.93).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that vaccine hesitancy should be monitored over time to inform communication strategies, which are responsive to changes in vaccination-related public sentiments. Additionally, a focus on social solidarity and the importance of women in vaccination advocacy can help improve COVID-19 vaccination coverage in West Africa.Trial registration numberThe general protocol is registered on clinicaltrial.gov (protocol number: NCT04912284).

Dataset Information

Endorsement of alternative medicine and vaccine hesitancy among physicians: A cross-sectional study in four European countries.

Publications

Endorsement of alternative medicine and vaccine hesitancy among physicians: A cross-sectional study in four European countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets