Perception and practices on COVID-19 vaccination and booster dose acceptability among health-care workers – A questionnaire-based study

Q2 Medicine
Nivethia K. Rathinakumar, Anandabaskar Nishanthi, Shanthi Manickam
{"title":"Perception and practices on COVID-19 vaccination and booster dose acceptability among health-care workers – A questionnaire-based study","authors":"Nivethia K. Rathinakumar, Anandabaskar Nishanthi, Shanthi Manickam","doi":"10.4103/picr.picr_64_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aim: To assess the perception and practices on COVID-19 vaccination and to determine the predictors of booster dose acceptability among health-care workers (HCWs) in South India. Materials and Methods: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey on the perception and practices on COVID-19 vaccination and booster dose acceptability among the HCWs in South India. We prepared an online self-administered validated questionnaire, and the Google form link to it was circulated from March 28, 2022 to April 27, 2022, in the social media groups of the HCWs. We used binary logistic regression to identify the predictors of booster dose acceptability among HCWs. Results: Overall, we obtained 572 valid responses, of which the majority were from paramedical workers compared to doctors. Most of the respondents were unmarried females aged <30 years. Around 31.6% had been previously diagnosed with COVID-19. About 97.9%, 88.8%, and 12.6% of the participants have taken the first, second, and booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, respectively. Among the respondents, 19.7% refused to take the booster dose. The main reason for booster dose refusal is the belief that two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine are sufficient to confer disease protection. Believing vaccination to be one of the most effective measures in COVID-19 prevention and being doctors by profession were the chief predictors of booster dose acceptance among HCWs. Conclusion: While the uptake of the primary COVID-19 vaccination series was commendable among Indian HCWs, booster dose was taken only by a minority of them.","PeriodicalId":20015,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_64_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Aim: To assess the perception and practices on COVID-19 vaccination and to determine the predictors of booster dose acceptability among health-care workers (HCWs) in South India. Materials and Methods: We conducted an anonymous cross-sectional survey on the perception and practices on COVID-19 vaccination and booster dose acceptability among the HCWs in South India. We prepared an online self-administered validated questionnaire, and the Google form link to it was circulated from March 28, 2022 to April 27, 2022, in the social media groups of the HCWs. We used binary logistic regression to identify the predictors of booster dose acceptability among HCWs. Results: Overall, we obtained 572 valid responses, of which the majority were from paramedical workers compared to doctors. Most of the respondents were unmarried females aged <30 years. Around 31.6% had been previously diagnosed with COVID-19. About 97.9%, 88.8%, and 12.6% of the participants have taken the first, second, and booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, respectively. Among the respondents, 19.7% refused to take the booster dose. The main reason for booster dose refusal is the belief that two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine are sufficient to confer disease protection. Believing vaccination to be one of the most effective measures in COVID-19 prevention and being doctors by profession were the chief predictors of booster dose acceptance among HCWs. Conclusion: While the uptake of the primary COVID-19 vaccination series was commendable among Indian HCWs, booster dose was taken only by a minority of them.
卫生保健工作者对COVID-19疫苗接种和加强剂可接受性的认识和做法——一项基于问卷的研究
目的:评估南印度卫生保健工作者(HCWs)对COVID-19疫苗接种的认知和实践,并确定加强剂量可接受性的预测因素。材料和方法:我们对印度南部卫生保健工作者对COVID-19疫苗接种和加强剂量可接受性的认知和实践进行了匿名横断面调查。我们准备了一份在线自我管理的有效问卷,并于2022年3月28日至2022年4月27日在卫生保健工作者的社交媒体群中分发了谷歌表格链接。我们使用二元逻辑回归来确定医护人员加强剂量可接受性的预测因素。结果:总体而言,我们获得了572份有效回复,其中大部分来自医务辅助人员,而不是医生。大多数受访者是30岁的未婚女性。约31.6%的人之前被诊断出患有COVID-19。约97.9%、88.8%和12.6%的参与者分别接种了第一剂、第二剂和加强剂COVID-19疫苗。在受访者中,有19.7%的人拒绝接种加强剂。拒绝加强剂量的主要原因是认为两剂COVID-19疫苗足以提供疾病保护。认为疫苗接种是预防COVID-19最有效的措施之一和职业医生是卫生保健工作者接受加强剂量的主要预测因素。结论:虽然印度卫生保健工作者对COVID-19初级疫苗系列的采用值得赞扬,但只有少数人接种了加强剂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Perspectives in Clinical Research
Perspectives in Clinical Research Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: This peer review quarterly journal is positioned to build a learning clinical research community in India. This scientific journal will have a broad coverage of topics across clinical research disciplines including clinical research methodology, research ethics, clinical data management, training, data management, biostatistics, regulatory and will include original articles, reviews, news and views, perspectives, and other interesting sections. PICR will offer all clinical research stakeholders in India – academicians, ethics committees, regulators, and industry professionals -a forum for exchange of ideas, information and opinions.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信