3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Western Australian health care workers’ views on mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for the workplace

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Health care workers (HCWs) are at an increased risk of catching and spreading Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with the general community, putting health systems at risk. Several jurisdictions globally have mandated or are looking to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for this cohort, but little is known about the acceptability of this measure, especially in different contexts, and there is little qualitative data to explore nuance, depth, and the reasons behind HCWs’ opinions.

          Methods

          In-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with 39 HCWs in Western Australia (WA) between February-August 2021, ascertaining their views on the prospective introduction and implementation of mandates for COVID-19 vaccines. Data were thematically analysed using NVivo 20.

          Results

          There was broad support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs amongst our participants, but also different views about what such a mandate would mean (redeployment versus termination) and how it would impact the rest of the workforce. One vaccine hesitant participant said that mandates would be their prompt to get vaccinated. Other participants invoked an informal code whereby HCWs have an obligation to be seen to support vaccination and to protect public health more broadly. However, they also raised concerns about implementation and procedural and policy fairness.

          Conclusion

          Policymakers should consider how to mobilise the informal code of health promotion and public health support if introducing mandates. They should also consider whether HCWs will bring the same attitudes and approaches to mandates for additional vaccine doses.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners

          The Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data management platform was developed in 2004 to address an institutional need at Vanderbilt University, then shared with a limited number of adopting sites beginning in 2006. Given bi-directional benefit in early sharing experiments, we created a broader consortium sharing and support model for any academic, non-profit, or government partner wishing to adopt the software. Our sharing framework and consortium-based support model have evolved over time along with the size of the consortium (currently more than 3200 REDCap partners across 128 countries). While the "REDCap Consortium" model represents only one example of how to build and disseminate a software platform, lessons learned from our approach may assist other research institutions seeking to build and disseminate innovative technologies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study

            Summary Background Data for front-line health-care workers and risk of COVID-19 are limited. We sought to assess risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers compared with the general community and the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on risk. Methods We did a prospective, observational cohort study in the UK and the USA of the general community, including front-line health-care workers, using self-reported data from the COVID Symptom Study smartphone application (app) from March 24 (UK) and March 29 (USA) to April 23, 2020. Participants were voluntary users of the app and at first use provided information on demographic factors (including age, sex, race or ethnic background, height and weight, and occupation) and medical history, and subsequently reported any COVID-19 symptoms. We used Cox proportional hazards modelling to estimate multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of our primary outcome, which was a positive COVID-19 test. The COVID Symptom Study app is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04331509. Findings Among 2 035 395 community individuals and 99 795 front-line health-care workers, we recorded 5545 incident reports of a positive COVID-19 test over 34 435 272 person-days. Compared with the general community, front-line health-care workers were at increased risk for reporting a positive COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 11·61, 95% CI 10·93–12·33). To account for differences in testing frequency between front-line health-care workers and the general community and possible selection bias, an inverse probability-weighted model was used to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 test (adjusted HR 3·40, 95% CI 3·37–3·43). Secondary and post-hoc analyses suggested adequacy of PPE, clinical setting, and ethnic background were also important factors. Interpretation In the UK and the USA, risk of reporting a positive test for COVID-19 was increased among front-line health-care workers. Health-care systems should ensure adequate availability of PPE and develop additional strategies to protect health-care workers from COVID-19, particularly those from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic backgrounds. Additional follow-up of these observational findings is needed. Funding Zoe Global, Wellcome Trust, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institutes of Health Research, UK Research and Innovation, Alzheimer's Society, National Institutes of Health, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and Massachusetts Consortium on Pathogen Readiness.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Individual determinants of research utilization by nurses: a systematic review update

              Background Interventions that have a better than random chance of increasing nurses' use of research are important to the delivery of quality patient care. However, few reports exist of successful research utilization in nursing interventions. Systematic identification and evaluation of individual characteristics associated with and predicting research utilization may inform the development of research utilization interventions. Objective To update the evidence published in a previous systematic review on individual characteristics influencing research utilization by nurses. Methods As part of a larger systematic review on research utilization instruments, 12 online bibliographic databases were searched. Hand searching of specialized journals and an ancestry search was also conducted. Randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, and observational study designs examining the association between individual characteristics and nurses' use of research were eligible for inclusion. Studies were limited to those published in the English, Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian languages. A vote counting approach to data synthesis was taken. Results A total of 42,770 titles were identified, of which 501 were retrieved. Of these 501 articles, 45 satisfied our inclusion criteria. Articles assessed research utilization in general (n = 39) or kinds of research utilization (n = 6) using self-report survey measures. Individual nurse characteristics were classified according to six categories: beliefs and attitudes, involvement in research activities, information seeking, education, professional characteristics, and socio-demographic/socio-economic characteristics. A seventh category, critical thinking, emerged in studies examining kinds of research utilization. Positive relationships, at statistically significant levels, for general research utilization were found in four categories: beliefs and attitudes, information seeking, education, and professional characteristics. The only characteristic assessed in a sufficient number of studies and with consistent findings for the kinds of research utilization was attitude towards research; this characteristic had a positive association with instrumental and overall research utilization. Conclusions This review reinforced conclusions in the previous review with respect to positive relationships between general research utilization and: beliefs and attitudes, and current role. Furthermore, attending conferences/in-services, having a graduate degree in nursing, working in a specialty area, and job satisfaction were also identified as individual characteristics important to research utilization. While these findings hold promise as potential targets of future research utilization interventions, there were methodological problems inherent in many of the studies that necessitate their findings be replicated in further research using more robust study designs and multivariate assessment methods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Policy Technol
                Health Policy Technol
                Health Policy and Technology
                Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine.
                2211-8837
                2211-8845
                26 July 2022
                26 July 2022
                : 100657
                Affiliations
                [a ]School of Social Sciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley WA 6009, Australia.
                [b ]Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, Telethon Kids Institute, Perth Children's Hospital, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia.
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Katie Attwell, School of Social Sciences, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway 6009.
                Article
                S2211-8837(22)00064-8 100657
                10.1016/j.hlpt.2022.100657
                9314263
                7c1a7c28-5a8a-4665-be14-4e5d86139a42
                © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Categories
                Original Article/Research

                vaccination,immunisation,mandates,australia, covid-19,qualitative,attitudes,healthcare workers

                Comments

                Comment on this article