Factors associated with early uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers in Azerbaijan, 2021.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
We evaluated uptake and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination among health workers (HWs) in Azerbaijan.Results
Among 1575 HWs, 73% had received at least one dose, and 67% received two doses; all received CoronaVac. Factors associated with vaccination uptake included no previous COVID-19 infection, older age, belief in the vaccine's safety, previous vaccination for influenza, having patient-facing roles and good or excellent health by self-assessment.Conclusion
These findings could inform strategies to increase vaccination uptake as the campaign continues.
SUBMITTER: Doran J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9111775 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Factors associated with early uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers in Azerbaijan, 2021.
Doran Jason J Seyidov Nabil N Mehdiyev Samir S Gon Giorgia G Kissling Esther E Herdman Trent T Suleymanova Javahir J Rehse Ana Paula Couthino APC Pebody Richard R Katz Mark A MA Hagverdiyev Gahraman G
Influenza and other respiratory viruses 20220322 4
<h4>Introduction</h4>We evaluated uptake and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination among health workers (HWs) in Azerbaijan.<h4>Results</h4>Among 1575 HWs, 73% had received at least one dose, and 67% received two doses; all received CoronaVac. Factors associated with vaccination uptake included no previous COVID-19 infection, older age, belief in the vaccine's safety, previous vaccination for influenza, having patient-facing roles and good or excellent health by self-assessment.<h4>Conclu ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:RNA was extracted from whole blood of subjects collected in Tempus tubes prior to COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccination. D01 and D21 correspond to samples collected at pre-dose 1 and pre-dose 2 respectively. RNA was also extracted from blood collected at indicated time points post-vaccination. DB1, DB2, DB4 and DB7 correspond to booster day 1 (pre-booster), booster day 2, booster day 4 and booster day 7 respectively. The case subject experienced cardiac complication following mRNA booster vaccination. We performed gene expression analysis of case versus controls over time.
2023-03-20 | E-MTAB-12829 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess reasons for noncompliance with COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs).DesignCohort observational and surveillance study.SettingSheba Medical Center, a 1,600-bed tertiary-care medical center in Israel.ParticipantsThe study included 10,888 HCWs including all employees, students, and volunteers.InterventionThe BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was offered to all HCWs of the hospital. Noncompliance was assessed, and pre-rollout and post-rollout surveys were conducted. Data regarding uptake of the vaccine as well as demographic data and compliance with prior influenza vaccination were collected, and 2 surveys were distributed. The survey before the rollout pertained to the intention to receive the vaccine, and the survey after the rollout pertained to all unvaccinated HCWs regarding causes of hesitancy.ResultsIn the pre-rollout survey, 1,673 (47%) of 3,563 HCWs declared their intent to receive the vaccine. Overall, 8,108 (79%) HCWs received the COVID-19 vaccine within 40 days of rollout. In a multivariate logistic regression model, the factors that were significant predictors of vaccine uptake were male sex, age 40-59 years, occupation (paramedical professionals and doctors), high socioeconomic level, and compliance with flu vaccine. Among 425 unvaccinated HCWs who answered the second survey, the most common cause for hesitancy was the risk during pregnancy (31%).ConclusionsAlthough vaccine uptake among HCWs was higher than expected, relatively low uptake was observed among young women and those from lower socioeconomic levels and educational backgrounds. Concerns regarding vaccine safety during pregnancy were common and more data about vaccine safety, especially during pregnancy, might improve compliance.
| S-EPMC8503070 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST563 | biostudies-other
Project description:Vaccination attitudes among healthcare workers (HCWs) predict their level of vaccination uptake and intention to recommend vaccinations to their patients. To our knowledge, no study has been conducted in South Africa to assess hesitancy toward influenza vaccines among HCWs. We adapted a questionnaire developed and validated by Betsch and colleagues and used it to conduct online and face-to-face interviews among HCWs at the start of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess predictors of influenza vaccine hesitancy. Of 401 participants, 64.5% were women, 49.2% were nurses, and 12.5% were physicians. A total of 54.9% were willing to accept, 20.4% were undecided, and 24.7% intended to refuse influenza vaccination. Participants who were above 25 years of age and physicians were more likely to accept the vaccine. Key predictors of vaccine acceptance were confidence in the effectiveness, consideration of benefits and risks, and willingness to be vaccinated to protect others. Influenza vaccine hesitancy was highest in those who did not trust that influenza vaccines are safe. For future flu seasons, tailored education programs on the safety and effectiveness of flu vaccines targeting younger HCWs, could be vital to improving vaccine uptake.
| S-EPMC9332543 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) have suffered considerable morbidity and mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies have evaluated the CoronaVac vaccine effectiveness (VE), particularly in Eastern Europe, where the vaccine has been widely used.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study among HCWs in seven hospitals in Baku, Azerbaijan between May 17 and November 30, 2021, to evaluate primary series (two-dose) CoronaVac VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants completed weekly symptom questionnaires, provided nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing when symptomatic, and provided serology samples at enrollment that were tested for anti-spike and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. We estimated VE as (1 - hazard ratio)*100 using a Cox proportional hazards model with vaccination status as a time-varying exposure, adjusting for hospital and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection status.ResultsWe enrolled 1582 HCWs. At enrollment, 1040 (66%) had received two doses of CoronaVac; 421 (27%) were unvaccinated. During the study period, 72 PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred; 36/39 (92%) sequenced samples were classified as Delta variants. Primary series VE against COVID-19 illness was 29% (95% CI: -51%; 67%) for the entire analysis period. For the Delta-only period (July 1-November 30, 2021), primary series VE was 19% (95% CI: -81%; 64%). For the entire analysis period, primary series VE was 39% (95% CI: -40%; 73%) for HCWs vaccinated within 14-149 days and 19% (95% CI: -81%; 63%) for those vaccinated ≥150 days.ConclusionsDuring a period in Azerbaijan characterized by mostly Delta circulation, VE point estimates suggested that primary series CoronaVac protected nearly 1 in 3 HCWs against COVID-19, but 95% confidence intervals were wide, with lower bounds that crossed zero, reflecting the limited precision of our VE estimates. Our findings underscore the need to consider booster doses for individuals who have received the primary series of CoronaVac.
| S-EPMC10548024 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Elderly and patients with comorbid conditions have higher risk of infection and complications. Vaccination hesitancy is defined as the refusal of vaccine or the delay in accepting it despite the availability of vaccines and vaccination services. This study was aimed at assessing knowledge, perception, and acceptability of healthcare staff towards different types of COVID-19 vaccination. A multicenter hospital-based descriptive cross-sectional study was implemented to study the knowledge, perception, and acceptability of healthcare staff towards COVID-19 vaccination. Multistage sampling technique was applied. Data were collected through a self-administered questionnaire filled by the participants. 400 participants were studied. 61% of the participants were females, and the most frequent age reported was between 18 and 35 years (67%). A statistically significant association (p = 0.048) was found between knowledge about vaccination and professions. The most common vaccine type known and accepted was AstraZeneca vaccine. On assessing acceptability of COVID-19 vaccination, acceptance rate was high (63.8%) and 22.7% of the participants had already got vaccinated. The rejection rate among our staff was 27.4%. This study was conducted in April, 2021. Majority of our healthcare staff believed that vaccination is the key to combat the pandemic. One of the issues and concerns about vaccination was the safety and the risk of developing acute adverse events (p = 0.001). Encouraging factor for vaccination was the fear of getting infection themselves and their families. The present study revealed the presence of good knowledge and acceptability among medical staff towards COVID-19 vaccinations in Sudan.
| S-EPMC8832156 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The coronavirus pneumonia is still spreading around the world. Much progress has been made in vaccine development, and vaccination will become an inevitable trend in the fight against this pandemic. However, the public acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination still remains uncertain. Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was used in Wen Juan Xing survey platform. All the respondents were divided into healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the key sociodemographic, cognitive, and attitude associations among the samples of healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers. Results: A total of 2,580 respondents completed the questionnaire, including 1,329 healthcare workers and 1,251 non-healthcare workers. This study showed that 76.98% of healthcare workers accepted the COVID-19 vaccine, 18.28% workers were hesitant, and 4.74% workers were resistant. Among the non-healthcare workers, 56.19% workers received the COVID-19 vaccine, 37.57% workers were hesitant, and 6.24% workers were resistant. Among the healthcare workers, compared with vaccine recipients, vaccine-hesitant individuals were more likely to be female (AOR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.12-2.07); vaccine-resistant individuals were more likely to live in the suburbs (AOR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.44-3.99) with an income of 10,000 RMB or greater (AOR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.03-3.90). Among the non-healthcare workers, vaccine-hesitant individuals were more likely to be female (AOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.31-2.11); vaccine-resistant individuals were also more likely to be female (AOR = 1.87, 95% CI: 1.16-3.02) and older than 65 years (AOR = 4.96, 95% CI: 1.40-7.62). There are great differences between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers in their cognition and attitude toward vaccines. Conclusions: Our study shows that healthcare workers are more willing to be vaccinated than non-healthcare workers. Current vaccine safety issues continue to be a major factor affecting public acceptance, and to expand vaccine coverage in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, appropriate vaccination strategies and immunization programs are essential, especially for non-healthcare workers.
| S-EPMC8364953 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionHealthcare students are more likely to become infected than other university students as they may encounter patients with COVID-19 during clinical training. Vaccination uptake is essential to prevent infection. This study explored factors related to COVID-19 vaccination uptake among healthcare students.MethodsThis cross-sectional study conducted online surveys of undergraduate and graduate nursing and healthcare graduate students from four medical universities in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area of Japan. Data were collected from June to August 2022, when the fourth vaccination program was initiated.ResultsData from 1,169 students were analyzed (response rate = 37.3%). The mean age was 25.1 ± 7.6 years, and most were female (82.3%). Academic majors included nursing (68.0%), medicine (16.3%), dentistry (9.3%), and others (6.4%). Thirty students (2.6%) were not vaccinated, one student (0.1%) had received one vaccination, 997 (85.3%) had received three, and 27 (2.3%) had received four. The major reason for not being vaccinated was insufficient confirmation of its safety (n = 25). Students who had received at least one vaccination (n = 1,139), 965 (84.7%) reported experiencing adverse side effects, the most frequent being pain at the injection site (76.2%), followed by fever (68.3%). In the logistic regression, a greater number of vaccinations (3-4 times) was associated with older age (odds ratio, OR = 1.53), working (OR = 1.67), and more frequent infection-preventive behaviors (OR = 1.05). Significantly fewer students were vaccinated at University B than at University A (OR = 0.46). Additionally, those majoring in subjects other than nursing (OR = 0.28), and students from non-Asian countries (OR = 0.30) were less likely to be vaccinated.DiscussionIt is necessary to pay attention to and encourage the vaccination of students who engage in low levels of preventive behavior, students who are young, international, or unemployed, and those in non-healthcare professional majors.
| S-EPMC10752956 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study evaluated the immune response to vaccination against COVID-19 in 534 healthcare frontline workers in Vilnius, Lithuania. The incidence of COVID-19 was reduced significantly after vaccination started in the healthcare sector. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in groups V-VII and this level of antibodies was found to be effective in preventing COVID-19. Sustained immune response was achieved after two vaccination doses, which remained stable for up to 6 months. After the booster dose, antibody levels remained high for an additional 12 months. Although SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels decreased after 6 months, even lower levels of antibodies provided protection against the Delta strain. The booster dose distributed the antibody titer in the high-level antibody groups, offering maximum protection at 12 months. However, even individuals with high antibody titers were observed to contract COVID-19 after vaccination with a booster dose and 6 months in the presence of the Omicron strain. Unfortunately, high levels of antibodies did not provide protection against the new strain of COVID-19 (the Omicron variant), posing a risk of infection. When comparing the antibody titer of vaccinated participants without COVID-19 and those with COVID-19, the change in antibodies after vaccination was significantly lower in infected participants. Individuals with comorbidities and specific conditions had lower antibody levels.
| S-EPMC10891992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe devastating effects of COVID-19 sparked debates among professionals in the fields of health, law, and bioethics regarding policies on mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers. Suboptimal vaccine uptake among healthcare workers had been implicated in the increased risk of nosocomial spread of COVID infection and absenteeism among healthcare workers, impacting the quality of patient care. However, mandatory vaccine policies were also seen to encroach on the autonomy of healthcare workers.Aims and objectivesTo synthesise the arguments for and against mandatory vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) and its long-term impact on the healthcare workforce, through an analysis of texts and opinions of professionals from different fields of study.MethodsThis is a systematic review of opinions published in peer-reviewed journals. After initial search in Cochrane and JBI systematic review databases to ensure no previous review had been done, five databases were searched (PsychInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Medline and Scopus). Inclusion criteria were: 1) focused on COVID-19; 2) healthcare workers specific; 3) specific to mandatory vaccination; 4) opinion piece with an identified author; and 5) in English.Exclusion1) focus on other vaccine preventable diseases, not COVID-19 and 2) discussion on mandatory vaccination not-specific to healthcare workers. The Joanna Briggs Critical Appraisal tool for Text and Opinions was used to assess quality. Data were synthesised in the summary table.ResultsThe review included 28 opinion and viewpoint articles. Of these, 12 (43 %) adopted a pro-mandatory vaccination stance, 13 (46 %) were neutral or had presented arguments from both sides of the debate and only three (11 %) were against. The overall arguments among those who were pro-, neutral and anti-mandatory COVID-19 vaccination were underpinned by ethical, moral and legal principles of such a mandate on a vulnerable healthcare workforce. This review highlighted the polarised opinions concerning choices, human rights, professional responsibilities and personal risks (i.e. health risks, losing a job) with the introduction of vaccination mandate. However, the articles found in this review discussed mandatory vaccination of healthcare workers in the USA, Europe and Australia only.ConclusionThe review underscores the need to balance the rights of the public to safe and quality care with the rights and moral obligations of healthcare workers during a public health emergency. This can be achieved when policies and mandates are guided by reliable scientific evidence which are flexible in considering legal and ethical dilemmas.Tweetable abstractTo mandate or not to mandate COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers: A synthesis of published opinions in health, law, and bioethics.
| S-EPMC9709452 | biostudies-literature