Racial/Ethnic Variances in COVID-19 Inoculation among Southern California Healthcare Workers.

Healthcare workers (HCWs) from minoritized communities are a critical partner in moving vaccine-hesitant populations toward vaccination, yet a significant number of these HCWs are delaying or deciding against their own COVID-19 vaccinations. Our study aims to provide a more nuanced understanding of vaccine hesitancy among racially and ethnically minoritized HCWs and to describe factors associated with vaccine non-acceptance. Analysis of a sub-sample of racially and ethnically minoritized HCWs (N = 1131), who participated in a cross-sectional study at two large Southern California medical centers, was conducted. Participants completed an online survey consisting of demographics, work setting and clinical role, influenza vaccination history, COVID-19 knowledge, beliefs, personal COVID-19 exposure, diagnosis, and impact on those closest to them. While overall most HCWs were vaccinated (84%), 28% of Black, 19% of Hispanic, and 8% of Asian American HCWs were vaccine-hesitant. Age, education level, occupation, history of COVID-19, and COVID-19 related knowledge were predictive of vaccine hesitancy. We found significant variations in COVID-19 related knowledge and reasons for vaccine hesitancy among Black (governmental mistrust), Hispanic (preference for physiological immunity), and Asian-American HCWs (concern about side effects) who were vaccine-hesitant or not. Our findings highlight racial and ethnic differences in vaccine-hesitancy and barriers to vaccination among HCWs of color. This study indicates the necessity of targeted interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy that are mindful of the disparities in knowledge and access and differences between and among racial and ethnic groups.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Southern California: Not Just "Anti" vs. "Pro" Vaccine.

In this study, we evaluated the status of and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination of healthcare workers in two major hospital systems (academic and private) in Southern California. Responses were collected via an anonymous and voluntary survey from a total of 2491 participants, including nurses, physicians, other allied health professionals, and administrators. Among the 2491 participants that had been offered the vaccine at the time of the study, 2103 (84%) were vaccinated. The bulk of the participants were middle-aged college-educated White (73%), non-Hispanic women (77%), and nursing was the most represented medical occupation (35%). Political affiliation, education level, and income were shown to be significant factors associated with vaccination status. Our data suggest that the current allocation of healthcare workers into dichotomous groups such as "anti-vaccine vs. pro-vaccine" may be inadequate in accurately tailoring vaccine uptake interventions. We found that healthcare workers that have yet to receive the COVID-19 vaccine likely belong to one of four categories: the misinformed, the undecided, the uninformed, or the unconcerned. This diversity in vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers highlights the importance of targeted intervention to increase vaccine confidence. Regardless of governmental vaccine mandates, addressing the root causes contributing to vaccine hesitancy continues to be of utmost importance.

Pediatric Chronic Illness Management: A Qualitative Dyadic Analysis of Adolescent Patient and Parent Illness Narratives.

In pediatric chronic illness, little is known about the relational interactions between adolescent patients, parents, and illnesses and how they influence self-management of illness. We conducted interviews with 32 individuals (16 dyads) representing adolescents diagnosed with a chronic illness and their primary parent who had been referred to a psychosocial treatment program for challenges with illness management. Interviews were conducted individually and analyzed dyadically using grounded theory to better understand the relational processes that may be contributing to illness management difficulties. Results include a theory of patient-parent illness responses and how parental illness meanings play a role in adolescent self-management. Results can be used to better understand and treat family relational patterns that may be influencing pediatric illness management challenges.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Family Systems Intervention for Managing Pediatric Chronic Illness.

Despite recent increases of psychosocial programs for pediatric chronic illness, few studies have explored their economic benefits. This study investigated the costs-benefits of a family systems-based, psychosocial intervention for pediatric chronic illness (MEND: Mastering Each New Direction). A quasi-prospective study compared the 12-month pre-post direct and indirect costs of 20 families. The total cost for program was estimated to $5,320. Families incurred $15,249 less in direct and $15,627 less in indirect costs after MEND. On average, medical expenses reduced by 86% in direct and indirect costs, for a cost-benefit ratio of 0.17. Therefore, for every dollar spent on the program, families and their third payers saved approximately $5.74. Implications for healthcare policy and reimbursements are discussed.