Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Factors associated with the decision to receive bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccination among health care personnel.
Mohr, Nicholas M; Plumb, Ian D; Santos León, Eliezer; Harland, Karisa K; Krishnadasan, Anusha; Nandi, Utsav; Hoth, Karin F; Smithline, Howard A; Talan, David A.
Affiliation
  • Mohr NM; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA.
  • Plumb ID; COVID-19 Response Team, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Santos León E; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA.
  • Harland KK; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA.
  • Krishnadasan A; Olive View-UCLA Education and Research Institute, Olive View-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  • Nandi U; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.
  • Hoth KF; Department of Psychiatry, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA.
  • Smithline HA; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Springfield, MA, USA.
  • Talan DA; Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 19(3): 2284471, 2023 Dec 15.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37994545
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 vaccination is effective at reducing SARS-CoV-2 complications, but uptake has been low. Our objective in this study was to compare the importance of factors reported to influence the decision to receive a bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccine among health care personnel (HCP) tested for SARS-CoV-2 between October 2022 and April 2023 in a 20-hospital vaccine effectiveness study in the United States (n = 1656). Compared with those who had not received the booster, the factors most likely to be reported to be important were concerns about contracting COVID-19 (84.0% of those who had received the bivalent booster vs. 47.5% of those who had not, difference 36.6% points (PP), 95% confidence interval [CI] 32.1 to 41.1%), spreading infection to family members (89.2% vs. 62.8%, difference 26.3 PP, 95% CI 22.3 to 30.4%), and spreading infection to colleagues at work (85.5% vs. 59.4%, difference 26.1 PP, 95% CI 21.7 to 30.5%). HCP who had received the booster more frequently cited the primary literature (61.7% vs. 31.8%, difference 29.9 PP, 95% CI 24.6 to 35.2%) and employer recommendations (48.3% vs. 29.8%, difference 18.5 PP, 95% CI 13.2 to 23.9%) as influencing their decision. This analysis provides insight into factors for targeting future vaccine messaging.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Health context: 1_ASSA2030 / 2_ODS3 / 4_TD Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Vaccines / COVID-19 Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Year: 2023 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Health context: 1_ASSA2030 / 2_ODS3 / 4_TD Database: MEDLINE Main subject: COVID-19 Vaccines / COVID-19 Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Year: 2023 Document type: Article