COVID-19时代卫生保健专业人员的疫苗犹豫

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Health Education Research Pub Date : 2023-05-22 DOI:10.1093/her/cyad003
Hagar Z Pikkel Geva, Harel Gershgoren, Dana Nir, Maram Khazen, Adam J Rose
{"title":"COVID-19时代卫生保健专业人员的疫苗犹豫","authors":"Hagar Z Pikkel Geva,&nbsp;Harel Gershgoren,&nbsp;Dana Nir,&nbsp;Maram Khazen,&nbsp;Adam J Rose","doi":"10.1093/her/cyad003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health-care professionals (HCPs) are key trusted figures in addressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) challenges. They are thought to influence others' health decisions by personal example. However, during the COVID-19 crisis, some HCPs hesitated to be vaccinated. We examined factors contributing to that decision. We performed 12 semi-structured interviews, between February and May 2021, with Israeli HCPs who had declined or delayed COVID-19 vaccination. Three coders conducted a combined top-down and bottom-up analysis. We identified four main themes shaping vaccine decision-making: (i) sources of information, (ii) perceptions of necessity and risks of the vaccine, (iii) individual versus collective responsibility and (iv) political climate and media influence. Participants were worried about long-term effectiveness and safety, and while many agreed that high-risk populations should be vaccinated, all considered themselves to be at low risk for serious disease. Some felt they should avoid taking a perceived risk (accepting a new vaccine) to protect society, although they felt pressured to do so. Vaccination campaign politization and the way the media approached the subject also contributed to mistrust and hesitancy to be vaccinated. These findings help us understand HCP beliefs and uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccinations. This study can help inform future campaigns targeted at HCPs to promote the acceptance of vaccines.</p>","PeriodicalId":48236,"journal":{"name":"Health Education Research","volume":"38 3","pages":"193-203"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vaccine hesitancy among health-care professionals in the era of COVID-19.\",\"authors\":\"Hagar Z Pikkel Geva,&nbsp;Harel Gershgoren,&nbsp;Dana Nir,&nbsp;Maram Khazen,&nbsp;Adam J Rose\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/her/cyad003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Health-care professionals (HCPs) are key trusted figures in addressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) challenges. They are thought to influence others' health decisions by personal example. However, during the COVID-19 crisis, some HCPs hesitated to be vaccinated. We examined factors contributing to that decision. We performed 12 semi-structured interviews, between February and May 2021, with Israeli HCPs who had declined or delayed COVID-19 vaccination. Three coders conducted a combined top-down and bottom-up analysis. We identified four main themes shaping vaccine decision-making: (i) sources of information, (ii) perceptions of necessity and risks of the vaccine, (iii) individual versus collective responsibility and (iv) political climate and media influence. Participants were worried about long-term effectiveness and safety, and while many agreed that high-risk populations should be vaccinated, all considered themselves to be at low risk for serious disease. Some felt they should avoid taking a perceived risk (accepting a new vaccine) to protect society, although they felt pressured to do so. Vaccination campaign politization and the way the media approached the subject also contributed to mistrust and hesitancy to be vaccinated. These findings help us understand HCP beliefs and uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccinations. This study can help inform future campaigns targeted at HCPs to promote the acceptance of vaccines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Education Research\",\"volume\":\"38 3\",\"pages\":\"193-203\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Education Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyad003\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyad003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

卫生保健专业人员是应对2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)挑战的关键可靠人物。他们被认为通过个人榜样影响他人的健康决定。然而,在2019冠状病毒病危机期间,一些医护人员对接种疫苗犹豫不决。我们研究了促成这一决定的因素。我们在2021年2月至5月期间对拒绝或推迟接种COVID-19疫苗的以色列医务人员进行了12次半结构化访谈。三位编码员进行了自顶向下和自底向上的综合分析。我们确定了影响疫苗决策的四个主要主题:(i)信息来源,(ii)对疫苗必要性和风险的看法,(iii)个人与集体责任,(iv)政治气候和媒体影响。与会者担心疫苗的长期有效性和安全性,虽然许多人同意高危人群应该接种疫苗,但他们都认为自己患严重疾病的风险很低。一些人认为,为了保护社会,他们应该避免承担可感知的风险(接受一种新疫苗),尽管他们感到有这样做的压力。疫苗接种运动的政治化和媒体处理这一问题的方式也助长了对接种疫苗的不信任和犹豫。这些发现有助于我们理解HCP信念和COVID-19疫苗接种的不确定性。这项研究有助于为未来针对卫生保健提供者的运动提供信息,以促进疫苗的接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Vaccine hesitancy among health-care professionals in the era of COVID-19.

Health-care professionals (HCPs) are key trusted figures in addressing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) challenges. They are thought to influence others' health decisions by personal example. However, during the COVID-19 crisis, some HCPs hesitated to be vaccinated. We examined factors contributing to that decision. We performed 12 semi-structured interviews, between February and May 2021, with Israeli HCPs who had declined or delayed COVID-19 vaccination. Three coders conducted a combined top-down and bottom-up analysis. We identified four main themes shaping vaccine decision-making: (i) sources of information, (ii) perceptions of necessity and risks of the vaccine, (iii) individual versus collective responsibility and (iv) political climate and media influence. Participants were worried about long-term effectiveness and safety, and while many agreed that high-risk populations should be vaccinated, all considered themselves to be at low risk for serious disease. Some felt they should avoid taking a perceived risk (accepting a new vaccine) to protect society, although they felt pressured to do so. Vaccination campaign politization and the way the media approached the subject also contributed to mistrust and hesitancy to be vaccinated. These findings help us understand HCP beliefs and uncertainties about COVID-19 vaccinations. This study can help inform future campaigns targeted at HCPs to promote the acceptance of vaccines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Publishing original, refereed papers, Health Education Research deals with all the vital issues involved in health education and promotion worldwide - providing a valuable link between the health education research and practice communities.
期刊最新文献
The effect of face-to-face and online education provided to individuals with atrial fibrillation on medication adherence and satisfaction. The effect of health education on symptom severity in patients with fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Understanding the features and effectiveness of randomized controlled trials in reducing COVID-19 misinformation: a systematic review. Self-efficacy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: the effect of self-care education by two randomized methods-teach-back and a smartphone application. Correction to: Singlestick purchases: a comparative cross-country analysis in 10 African countries, Global Adult Tobacco Survey, 2012-21.
×
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