Assessment of the Citizens’ Perspectives on the COVID-19 Vaccination Process Which Are Ranked Last in The Vaccination Groups: Qualitative Reports from Turkey in the Early Stages of the Vaccination Process

Abdulkadir Aydin, Hamza Ali Akgunes, Erkut Etçioğlu, M. Aydın
{"title":"Assessment of the Citizens’ Perspectives on the COVID-19 Vaccination Process Which Are Ranked Last in The Vaccination Groups: Qualitative Reports from Turkey in the Early Stages of the Vaccination Process","authors":"Abdulkadir Aydin, Hamza Ali Akgunes, Erkut Etçioğlu, M. Aydın","doi":"10.33880/ejfm.2022110104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To evaluate the perspectives of the citizens ranking last in COVID-19 vaccination groups in terms of the vaccination process.\n\nMethods: In-depth interviews were carried out with the participants using the video conferencing method. Twenty-eight video conferencing interviews were conducted with citizens who ranked last in the vaccination groups. With the permission of the participants, an audio recording was obtained in all interviews, transcribed verbatim, and checked. A thematic approach was used to analyze the data. Data were collected until saturated.\n\nResults: The findings were summarized into three main categories. The first was “Satisfaction.” Participants expressed their satisfaction with process management, home vaccinations, and continuous information. The second theme was \"Dissatisfaction.” Some participants expressed their dissatisfaction with the prioritization of elderly people in vaccination and late vaccination of actively working individuals. The third theme was \"Reservations.\" Participants stated that they have reservations regarding a possible complacency in society after vaccinations and a delay in the vaccination of non-prioritized groups. In general, participants stated that they were satisfied with the supply of vaccines and performance. However, actively working individuals think that they should have priority over the elderly in vaccination.\n\nConclusion: To ensure full compliance with the vaccine administration, it is necessary to enlighten all individuals, especially those ranking last in the vaccination groups, about the prioritization process and which variables are considered important.\n\nKeywords: COVID-19, qualitative, vaccination, family practice","PeriodicalId":436322,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Journal of Family Medicine","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Journal of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33880/ejfm.2022110104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the perspectives of the citizens ranking last in COVID-19 vaccination groups in terms of the vaccination process. Methods: In-depth interviews were carried out with the participants using the video conferencing method. Twenty-eight video conferencing interviews were conducted with citizens who ranked last in the vaccination groups. With the permission of the participants, an audio recording was obtained in all interviews, transcribed verbatim, and checked. A thematic approach was used to analyze the data. Data were collected until saturated. Results: The findings were summarized into three main categories. The first was “Satisfaction.” Participants expressed their satisfaction with process management, home vaccinations, and continuous information. The second theme was "Dissatisfaction.” Some participants expressed their dissatisfaction with the prioritization of elderly people in vaccination and late vaccination of actively working individuals. The third theme was "Reservations." Participants stated that they have reservations regarding a possible complacency in society after vaccinations and a delay in the vaccination of non-prioritized groups. In general, participants stated that they were satisfied with the supply of vaccines and performance. However, actively working individuals think that they should have priority over the elderly in vaccination. Conclusion: To ensure full compliance with the vaccine administration, it is necessary to enlighten all individuals, especially those ranking last in the vaccination groups, about the prioritization process and which variables are considered important. Keywords: COVID-19, qualitative, vaccination, family practice
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估在疫苗接种组中排名最后的公民对COVID-19疫苗接种过程的看法:来自土耳其疫苗接种过程早期阶段的定性报告
目的:评价新冠肺炎疫苗接种群体中排名最后的公民对疫苗接种过程的看法。方法:采用视频会议方式对参试人员进行深度访谈。对在疫苗接种组中排名最后的公民进行了28次视频会议采访。在参与者的许可下,在所有访谈中获得录音,逐字抄录并检查。采用专题方法分析数据。数据一直收集到饱和为止。结果:研究结果可归纳为三大类。第一个是“满意度”。参与者对流程管理、家庭疫苗接种和持续信息表示满意。第二个主题是“不满”。一些与会者对老年人优先接种疫苗和积极工作的个人接种疫苗较晚表示不满。第三个主题是“预订”。与会者表示,他们对接种疫苗后社会可能出现的自满情绪和对非优先群体接种疫苗的延误持保留意见。总的来说,与会者表示,他们对疫苗的供应和工作表现感到满意。然而,积极工作的个人认为他们应该优先于老年人接种疫苗。结论:为了确保疫苗接种的完全依从性,有必要对所有个体,特别是在疫苗接种组中排名最后的个体进行启蒙,了解优先接种的过程和哪些变量被认为是重要的。关键词:COVID-19,定性,疫苗接种,家庭实践
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Three Methods, “Pap Smear, Conization and LEEP” in Women with Abnormal Pap Smear: A Ten-Year Retrospective Analytical Study Evaluation of Misbeliefs, Myths and Knowledge About Nevi and Skin Cancer in Dermatology Patients Breastfeeding Problems of Mothers in the Postpartum Period and Impact on Sleep Quality The Relationship of Pain Sensitivity and Severity with Quality of Life in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain The Relationship Between Parents’ Health Literacy Levels and Their Attitudes Towards Human Papillomavirus Vaccination
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1