An educational intervention in the emergency department seeking to improve COVID-19 vaccination rates among unvaccinated patients aged 20-64

IF 2.7 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Shelby DeWaard , Zachary Dewyer , Talal Al Assil , Rachael Gallap , Lauren Patrick , Noelle Fukuda , Maureen Ford
{"title":"An educational intervention in the emergency department seeking to improve COVID-19 vaccination rates among unvaccinated patients aged 20-64","authors":"Shelby DeWaard ,&nbsp;Zachary Dewyer ,&nbsp;Talal Al Assil ,&nbsp;Rachael Gallap ,&nbsp;Lauren Patrick ,&nbsp;Noelle Fukuda ,&nbsp;Maureen Ford","doi":"10.1016/j.idh.2023.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The COVID-19 vaccination<span> rate in the US has plateaued, especially among minorities and young populations. Previous efforts within the Emergency Department<span> (ED) setting to address this disparity<span> have shown positive results. The ED can play a crucial role in engaging vaccine-hesitant individuals, particularly those with limited access to healthcare. By providing education, addressing concerns, and using positive framing, vaccination rates can be improved in the ED. This quality improvement project aimed to increase vaccination rates through one-on-one educational interventions and open discussions with patients.</span></span></span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Between November 2021 and June 2022, unvaccinated adult patients aged 20 to 64 visiting a local ED in Kalamazoo, MI were approached for a discussion on COVID vaccines. A research team, trained in motivational interviewing techniques, provided an educational intervention, offering evidence-based information and resources to unvaccinated participants.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 37 participants were enrolled, and their demographics were recorded. The participants expressed various concerns about the vaccine, including potential side effects, speed of testing and production, perceived ineffectiveness, mistrust, and low personal risk. At the four-week follow-up, three participants (8%) had received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The study fell short of its desired sample size and the intervention failed to raise vaccination rates among ED patients. Factors like low perceived risk, vaccine hesitancy, and limited resources may have influenced these outcomes. Future research should focus on staffing, operational hours, repeated educational interventions, and targeted approaches for different populations. Improving participant recruitment through institutional engagement and involvement of multiple EDs should be explored. Addressing these factors can help inform effective interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates in the ED.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45006,"journal":{"name":"Infection Disease & Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Disease & Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468045123000408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The COVID-19 vaccination rate in the US has plateaued, especially among minorities and young populations. Previous efforts within the Emergency Department (ED) setting to address this disparity have shown positive results. The ED can play a crucial role in engaging vaccine-hesitant individuals, particularly those with limited access to healthcare. By providing education, addressing concerns, and using positive framing, vaccination rates can be improved in the ED. This quality improvement project aimed to increase vaccination rates through one-on-one educational interventions and open discussions with patients.

Methods

Between November 2021 and June 2022, unvaccinated adult patients aged 20 to 64 visiting a local ED in Kalamazoo, MI were approached for a discussion on COVID vaccines. A research team, trained in motivational interviewing techniques, provided an educational intervention, offering evidence-based information and resources to unvaccinated participants.

Results

A total of 37 participants were enrolled, and their demographics were recorded. The participants expressed various concerns about the vaccine, including potential side effects, speed of testing and production, perceived ineffectiveness, mistrust, and low personal risk. At the four-week follow-up, three participants (8%) had received their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Conclusion

The study fell short of its desired sample size and the intervention failed to raise vaccination rates among ED patients. Factors like low perceived risk, vaccine hesitancy, and limited resources may have influenced these outcomes. Future research should focus on staffing, operational hours, repeated educational interventions, and targeted approaches for different populations. Improving participant recruitment through institutional engagement and involvement of multiple EDs should be explored. Addressing these factors can help inform effective interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates in the ED.

急诊科的一项教育干预措施,旨在提高20-64岁未接种疫苗患者的新冠肺炎疫苗接种率。
背景:美国新冠肺炎疫苗接种率已趋于平稳,尤其是在少数民族和年轻人口中。此前,急诊科为解决这一差距所做的努力取得了积极成果。ED可以在吸引对疫苗犹豫不决的个人,特别是那些获得医疗保健机会有限的人方面发挥关键作用。通过提供教育、解决问题和使用积极的框架,可以提高ED的疫苗接种率。这一质量改进项目旨在通过一对一的教育干预和与患者的公开讨论来提高疫苗接种率。方法:在2021年11月至2022年6月期间,访问密歇根州卡拉马祖当地急诊室的20至64岁未接种疫苗的成年患者被邀请讨论新冠疫苗。一个接受过动机访谈技术培训的研究团队提供了教育干预,为未接种疫苗的参与者提供了循证信息和资源。结果:共有37名参与者被纳入,并记录了他们的人口统计数据。参与者表达了对疫苗的各种担忧,包括潜在副作用、测试和生产速度、无效性、不信任和低个人风险。在为期四周的随访中,三名参与者(8%)接种了第一剂新冠肺炎疫苗。结论:该研究没有达到预期的样本量,干预措施未能提高ED患者的疫苗接种率。低感知风险、疫苗犹豫和资源有限等因素可能影响了这些结果。未来的研究应侧重于人员配备、手术时间、重复的教育干预措施以及针对不同人群的有针对性的方法。应探索通过机构参与和多个ED的参与来改善参与者的招聘。解决这些因素有助于为提高ED新冠肺炎疫苗接种率的有效干预措施提供信息。
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
Infection Disease & Health
Infection Disease & Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
40
审稿时长
20 days
期刊介绍: The journal aims to be a platform for the publication and dissemination of knowledge in the area of infection and disease causing infection in humans. The journal is quarterly and publishes research, reviews, concise communications, commentary and other articles concerned with infection and disease affecting the health of an individual, organisation or population. The original and important articles in the journal investigate, report or discuss infection prevention and control; clinical, social, epidemiological or public health aspects of infectious disease; policy and planning for the control of infections; zoonoses; and vaccination related to disease in human health. Infection, Disease & Health provides a platform for the publication and dissemination of original knowledge at the nexus of the areas infection, Disease and health in a One Health context. One Health recognizes that the health of people is connected to the health of animals and the environment. One Health encourages and advances the collaborative efforts of multiple disciplines-working locally, nationally, and globally-to achieve the best health for people, animals, and our environment. This approach is fundamental because 6 out of every 10 infectious diseases in humans are zoonotic, or spread from animals. We would be expected to report or discuss infection prevention and control; clinical, social, epidemiological or public health aspects of infectious disease; policy and planning for the control of infections; zoonosis; and vaccination related to disease in human health. The Journal seeks to bring together knowledge from all specialties involved in infection research and clinical practice, and present the best work in this ever-changing field. The audience of the journal includes researchers, clinicians, health workers and public policy professionals concerned with infection, disease and health.
×
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