A Qualitative Study of Home Health Aides' Perspectives towards COVID-19 Vaccination.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Russell D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9548484 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A Qualitative Study of Home Health Aides' Perspectives towards COVID-19 Vaccination.
Russell David D Onorato Nicole N Stern Alexis A Vergez Sasha S Oberlink Mia M Luebke Matthew M Feldman Penny H PH McDonald Margaret V MV Sterling Madeline R MR
Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society 20221008 4
Home health aides provide care to homebound older adults and those with chronic conditions. Aides were less likely to receive COVID-19 vaccines when they became available. We examined aides' perspectives towards COVID-19 vaccination. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 56 home health aides at a large not-for-profit home care agency in New York City. Results suggested that aides' vaccination decisions were shaped by (1) information sources, beliefs, their health, and experiences providing ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionPregnant individuals have an increased risk of severe illness from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Vaccination is an effective strategy to prevent severe illness and complications for pregnant individuals. Pregnant individuals are often excluded from research and remain hesitant to receive vaccination against COVID-19. It is pivotal to study factors related to vaccine uptake and hesitancy among pregnant individuals. We studied barriers and facilitators for pregnant individuals choice and motivation regarding vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy to aid future pregnant individuals in their decision to vaccinate against various infectious agents.MethodsIn this qualitative study, pregnant individuals were interviewed between October 2021 and January 2022 using a semi-structured approach. A topic list was used to explore their feelings, perceptions and ideas regarding vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analyses was performed using MAX QDA.ResultsAfter nine interviews, saturation was reached. Three main themes were identified that influenced pregnant individuals choice and motivation regarding vaccination: health consequences, ambiguity of information and societal motivation. Health consequences mainly concerned the effect for their offspring, and the unknown long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccination. The advice from the Dutch institute for Public Health and Environment changed from not vaccinating pregnant individuals after release of the developed vaccine, to routinely vaccinating all pregnant individuals after research data were available from the United States of America (USA). This change of policy fuelled doubt and confusion for vaccination. Arguments in favor of vaccination from the social perspective were specific behaviour rules and restrictions due to the pandemic. E.g. without vaccination people were unable to travel abroad and having to take a COVID-19 test every time entering a public place.ConclusionPregnant individuals need clear, unambiguous information concerning health consequences, short- and long-term, particularly for their offspring, in the decision-making process regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Additionally, the societal perspective needs to be addressed. Besides the aforementioned themes, general counselling should focus on misperceptions of vaccine safety and the role of misinformation which are also important in the non-pregnant population. This study underlines the importance of including pregnant individuals in research programs to obtain specific information targeted to their needs.
| S-EPMC11371620 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Individuals who have Long COVID may have unique perspectives about COVID-19 vaccination due to the significant impact that COVID-19 has had on their lives. However, little is known about the specific vaccination perspectives among this patient population. The goal of our study was to improve our understanding of perspectives about COVID-19 vaccines among individuals with Long COVID. Interviews were conducted with patients receiving care at a post-COVID recovery clinic. Deductive thematic analysis was used to characterize participant perspectives according to the vaccine acceptance continuum framework, which recognizes a spectrum from vaccine acceptance to refusal. From interviews with 21 patients, we identified perspectives across the continuum of vaccine acceptance. These perspectives included acceptance of vaccines to prevent future illness, concerns about vaccine side effects on Long COVID symptoms, and refusal of vaccines due to perceived natural immunity. A limitation of our study is that these perspectives are specific to individuals receiving care at one post-COVID recovery clinic. In conclusion, our study demonstrates that some patients with Long COVID are uncertain about COVID-19 vaccines and boosters but may also be amenable to conversations that impact future vaccination acceptance. Patient perspectives should be considered when communicating recommendations for COVID-19 vaccinations to this population.
| S-EPMC10978020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHome care (HC) services are crucial to the health and social wellbeing of older adults, people with disabilities, and the chronically ill. Although the HC sector is growing rapidly in the USA, there is high job turnover among the HC aide workforce. HC provides an important alternative to facility-based care, yet it has often been overlooked within the larger health care system: most recently, in COVID-19 pandemic planning. The objective of the study was to characterize qualitatively the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on three key HC stakeholders: clients, aides, and agency managers.MethodsThe study included 37 phone interviews conducted during April - November 2020: HC clients (n = 9), aides (n = 16), and agency managers (n = 12). All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative analysis of the transcripts followed the grounded theory approach. The interview transcriptions were coded line-by-line into hierarchical themes with NVivo 12 software which allowed weighting of themes based on the number of interviews where they were coded.ResultsFear of infection and transmission among HC clients and aides were strong themes. Infection prevention and control became the top priority guiding day-to-day business operations at agencies; sourcing adequate personal protective equipment for staff was the most urgent task. HC aides expressed concerns for their clients who showed signs of depression, due to increased isolation during the pandemic. The disappearance of comforting touch - resulting from physical distancing practices - altered the expression of compassion in the HC aide-client care relationship.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that the pandemic has further increased psychosocial job demands of HC aides. Increased isolation of clients may be contributing to a wider public health problem of elder loneliness and depression. To support the HC stakeholders during the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, for future pandemic planning or other health emergencies, it is important to improve HC aide job retention. This action could also ease the serious care services shortage among the growing population of older adults.
| S-EPMC8491760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Science denialism is characterized by the refusal to accept existing consensus and available evidence. Typical strategies denialists employ include spreading conspiracies, selective use of information, relying on fake experts, or general fallacies in logic. A flood of misinformation, fake news, and conspiracy theories accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic. Simultaneously, it was a subject of many denialistic opinions, from denying the existence of the epidemic challenge to claims that questioned the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines. This study's main aim was to assess the manifestations of denialism in attitudes toward the preventive measures recommended during the pandemic, with a special focus on vaccination. In-depth interviews were conducted with fifty representatives of the general population, demonstrating diversified opinions about COVID-19 vaccines and other preventive behaviors. The interviews were performed face to face in participants' houses or at other places they identified as convenient. Some of the interviewees preferred to do the interview via teleconference. The interviews were carried out from November 2022 to March 2023. The interviewees were recruited initially by convenience, and in further stages, the snowball technique was used. The interviewees were residents of four main administrative districts in Poland. Out of 50 participants, 26 were males, 29 were between 18-40, 16 were inhabitants of rural areas, and 28 had a university level of education. The interviews were based on a semi-structured guide that addressed, in addition to views about the origin of the new coronavirus, respondents' attitudes toward vaccination and sanitary recommendation, the health status of interviewees, their use of healthcare services, and their health behaviors. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed with MAXQDA Analytics Pro 2022 software (Release 22.7.0). Thematic analysis (TA) was applied to the content generated from the interviews. Based on the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine, the participants were divided into three groups: unvaccinated, hesitant, and vaccinated (18, 4, and 28 interviewees, respectively). The main themes were established based on the TA of the interviews: attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination, perception of sources of information, and the origin of the new coronavirus. The first theme decidedly drew the greatest attention of the interviewees. There was also a clear relationship between vaccination status and the presence of denialist thinking among interviewees. Interestingly, the role of experts as a key source of information about the pandemic was underlined by study participants. However, the criteria for being an expert differed. The subject of the origin of a new coronavirus was not interesting to interviewees. The analysis of the adherence to preventive measures revealed an interplay of diversified attitudes and motivations. Individuals presenting denialist views most frequently abstained from COVID-19 vaccination. However, such views were also present among those who hesitated or even among those who had been vaccinated. Furthermore, denialism was only one of the determinants of adherence to preventive measures.
| S-EPMC10747861 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccination against COVID-19 has had a major impact over the course of the pandemic, leading to a reduced number of hospitalizations and deaths. However, the mass vaccination process has been accompanied by skepticism and hesitancy since its beginning. As health professionals and teachers are important public health actors who can strongly intervene to reduce vaccination hesitancy among their patients and students, respectively, this study aimed to assess their main perceptions towards COVID-19 vaccination.MethodsTwo focus group sessions, one with health professionals and the other with teachers, were conducted according to the COREQ checklist. Qualitative data were analyzed through theoretical thematic analysis.ResultsIn general, none of the groups showed vaccine hesitancy, although both groups had concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of the vaccines. The main concerns of health professionals were mostly related to the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, while teachers were more worried about the lack of access to reliable information about the COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsIt is plausible to conclude that it is imperative to provide clear and accurate information for the population in order to avoid vaccination hesitancy.
| S-EPMC9781933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 vaccines are one of the best tools to limit the spread of the virus. However, vaccine hesitancy is increasing worldwide, and France is one of the most hesitant countries. From the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, health care workers (HCW) have been prioritized in the vaccination strategy but were also hesitant. This study was conducted to identify and understand the determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention in the French context, with a view to promoting HCW vaccination. A qualitative study using individual semi-structured interviews of HCWs was carried out at the beginning of the vaccination campaign (January to April 2021) in a French university hospital. Interviews indicated that the vaccination intention of HCWs was influenced by confidence in the proposed vaccines, past experience with vaccines and disease, the opinions and vaccination status of others, and media handling of information related to COVID-19 vaccination. Improving HCW vaccination intention regarding COVID-19 vaccines could be achieved through the dissemination of clear, reassuring, scientific information. Information should be disseminated by HCWs and vaccination experts and adapted to local contexts. To improve the level of confidence and vaccination uptake through a compliance effect, it would be useful to promote positive COVID-19 vaccination experiences and increased rates of immunization.
| S-EPMC9611955 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study investigated home care aides' (HCAs) oral health care experience, knowledge, and their intention to receive professional training, to explain and predict factors of their intention to receive such training. This cross-sectional study collected data through a structured questionnaire. HCAs affiliated with home care agencies in Taichung, Taiwan were recruited through purposive sampling. A total of 487 questionnaires were distributed from September to December 2015 with 280 valid responses collected (57.4%).This study predicted the factors of HCAs' intention to receive oral health care training through a decision tree analysis. The decision tree model classified the respondents with an accuracy of 77.5%. The optimal predictor variable was oral health care knowledge (χ2 = 66.662, p < 0.0001). Among the low-scoring respondents on oral health care knowledge, 76.4% were classified in the "uninterested" group, whereas 84.8% of the high scorers were classified in the "interested" group. The second best predictor variable was whether oral health care is part of the job responsibility (χ2 = 7.979, p = 0.007). Among those who answered Yes, 92.9% were in the interested group, as were 76.5% of those who answered No. It is recommended to add "disease and oral care-related content" and "safety protection, assessment, and usage of oral care tools during practical oral care process" to the oral healthcare training course content for HCAs in order to improve HCAs' oral healthcare knowledge and oral care skills. These research findings are valuable and may be taken into account in the future development of the in-service educational training of oral healthcare for HCAs.
| S-EPMC8041167 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure (HF) affects six million people in the U.S., is associated with high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare utilization.(1, 2) Despite a decade of innovation, the majority of interventions aimed at reducing hospitalization and readmissions in HF have not been successful.(3-7) One reason may be that most have overlooked the role of home health aides and attendants (HHAs), who are often highly involved in HF care.(8-13) Despite their contributions, studies have found that HHAs lack specific HF training and have difficulty reaching their nursing supervisors when they need urgent help with their patients. Here we describe the protocol for a pilot randomized control trial (pRCT) assessing a novel stakeholder-engaged intervention that provides HHAs with a) HF training (enhanced usual care arm) and b) HF training plus a mobile health application that allows them to chat with a nurse in real-time (intervention arm). In collaboration with the VNS Health of New York, NY, we will conduct a single-site parallel arm pRCT with 104 participants (HHAs) to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness (primary outcomes: HF knowledge; HF caregiving self-efficacy) of the intervention among HHAs caring for HF patients. We hypothesize that educating and better integrating HHAs into the care team can improve their ability to provide support for patients and outcomes for HF patients as well (exploratory outcomes include hospitalization, emergency department visits, and readmission). This study offers a novel and potentially scalable way to leverage the HHA workforce and improve the outcomes of the patients for whom they care. Clinical trial.gov registration: NCT04239911.
| S-EPMC11283941 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated how vaccine hesitancy impacts are translated nationally and internationally. A predictor of vaccine hesitancy is religious beliefs (eg, the body being sacred and should be healed by God). Additionally, the perceived content of vaccines can conflict with religious dietary restrictions. Despite the main faith organisations in the UK endorsing COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge. Most faith-based research and interventions have been investigated in individual faiths, in isolation from others. Therefore, the aim of our research is to inform the development of interfaith interventions to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, following the identification of potential facilitators and barriers and codesign of interfaith intervention(s).Methods and analysisWe will facilitate six face-to-face focus groups in London, each comprising eight participants. There will also be the option of joining an online focus group. A semistructured topic guide will include questions on experiences around interfaith, vaccine hesitancy, facilitators and barriers, and potential interfaith interventions to increase vaccine acceptance. Focus group participants will be invited to join a subsequent interfaith codesign workshop where the researchers will share the tentative findings and facilitate discussion to develop one or more interventions. Purposive sampling will be used to recruit 48 participants from different faith groups, ethnicities and backgrounds to capture diversity in the sample. Reflexive thematic analysis will guide a systematic process of constant comparison, coding data into categories and refining into overarching themes.Ethics and disseminationThe University College London (UCL) Research Ethics Committee granted ethics approval (Project ID 4359.006) on 3 May 2022. Minor amendments to the study were approved on 15 May 2023 to accommodate participants' requests for online or face-to-face focus groups at a UCL venue. Informed consent is required from all participants. The findings will be disseminated in journals and to the public and key stakeholders.
| S-EPMC10860069 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic posed unique challenges to cancer-related care as health systems balanced competing risks of timely delivery of care and minimizing exposure to infection in a high-risk, immunocompromised patient population. This study aimed to better understand how pandemic-related factors affected the patient experience of cancer care during this time.MethodsWe conducted fifteen semi-structured interviews with adults from rural counties in Maryland who were diagnosed with and/or actively treated for cancer at the TidalHealth healthcare network between January 2020 and October 2022.ResultsInterviews from fifteen participants were analyzed. Two major themes emerged including COVID Impact on Care, and COVID Impact on Mental Health. Subthemes under COVID Impact on Care include Staffing Shortages, Hospital Regulations, Visitation, Importance of Advocacy, and Telehealth Utilization, and subthemes under COVID Impact on Mental Health include Loneliness, Support Networks, and Perceptions of COVID and Personal Protection. Overall, participants described positive care experiences despite notable delays, disruptions to continuity of care, difficult transitions to telemedicine, visitation policies that limited patient support, increased mental health struggles related to social distancing measures, and greater desire for patient advocacy.ConclusionOur findings reveal significant impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on experiences of cancer treatment and survivorship in a more vulnerable, rural patient population with lower healthcare access and income level. Our findings suggest areas for targeted interventions to limit disruptions to quality care in future public health emergencies.
| S-EPMC11238955 | biostudies-literature