Are COVID-19 vaccination mandates for healthcare workers effective? A systematic review of the impact of mandates on increasing vaccination, alleviating staff shortages and decreasing staff illness.

INTRODUCTION: The rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines is a cornerstone in the global effort to combat the pandemic. Healthcare workers (HCWs), being at the forefront of the pandemic response, have been the focus of vaccine mandate policies. This review aims to evaluate the impacts of COVID-19 vaccine mandates among HCWs, a critical step in understanding the broader implications of such policies in healthcare settings. OBJECTIVE: The review seeks to synthesize available literature to contribute to greater understanding of the outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs including vaccine uptake, infection rates, and staffing. METHODS: A systematic search of relevant literature published from March 2020 to September 2023 was conducted. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed for quality assessment of the included articles. A total of 4,779 publications were identified, with 15 studies meeting the inclusion criteria for the review. A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyze these studies. RESULTS: COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs were broadly successful in increasing vaccine uptake in most settings. Although the penalties imposed on unvaccinated HCWs did not lead to major disruption of health services, less well-resourced areas may have been more impacted. Furthermore, there is insufficient literature on the impact of the vaccine mandate on reducing SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs have significant implications for public health policy and healthcare management. The findings underscore the need for tailored approaches in mandate policies, considering the specific contexts of healthcare settings and the diverse populations of HCWs. While mandates have shown potential in increasing vaccine uptake with minimal impacts to staffing, more work is needed to investigate the impacts of mandates across various contexts. In addition to these impacts, future research should focus on long-term effects and implications on broader public health strategies.

Vaccination, time lost from work, and COVID-19 infections: a Canadian healthcare worker retrospective cohort study.

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted hurdles for healthcare delivery and personnel globally. Vaccination has been an important tool for preventing severe illness and death in healthcare workers (HCWs) as well as the public at large. However, vaccination has resulted in some HCWs requiring time off work post-vaccination to recover from adverse events. We aimed to understand which HCWs needed to take time off work post-vaccination, for which vaccine types and sequence, and how post-vaccination absence impacted uptake of booster doses in a cohort of 26,267 Canadian HCWs. By March 31, 2022, more than 98% had received at least two doses of the approved COVID-19 vaccines, following a two-dose mandate. We found that recent vaccination and longer intervals between doses were associated with significantly higher odds of time-loss, whereas being a medical resident and receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine were associated with lower odds. A history of lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with lower odds of receiving a booster dose compared with no documented infection, aOR 0.61 (95% CI: 0.55, 0.68). Similarly, taking sick time following the first or second dose was associated with lower odds of receiving a booster dose, aOR 0.83 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.90). As SARS-CoV-2 becomes endemic, the number and timing of additional doses for HCWs requires consideration of prevention of illness as well as service disruption from post-vaccination time-loss. Care should be taken to ensure adequate staffing if many HCWs are being vaccinated, especially for coverage for those who are more likely to need time off to recover.

Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute?

Objectives: To ascertain whether and how working as a partnership of two World Health Organization collaborating centres (WHOCCs), based respectively in the Global North and Global South, can add insights on "what works to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during a pandemic, in what contexts, using what mechanism, to achieve what outcome". Methods: A realist synthesis of seven projects in this research program was carried out to characterize context (C) (including researcher positionality), mechanism (M) (including service relationships) and outcome (O) in each project. An assessment was then conducted of the role of the WHOCC partnership in each study and overall. Results: The research found that lower-resourced countries with higher economic disparity, including South Africa, incurred greater occupational health risk and had less acceptable measures to protect HCWs at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than higher-income more-equal counterpart countries. It showed that rigorously adopting occupational health measures can indeed protect the healthcare workforce; training and preventive initiatives can reduce workplace stress; information systems are valued; and HCWs most at-risk (including care aides in the Canadian setting) can be readily identified to trigger adoption of protective actions. The C-M-O analysis showed that various ways of working through a WHOCC partnership not only enabled knowledge sharing, but allowed for triangulating results and, ultimately, initiatives for worker protection. Conclusions: The value of an international partnership on a North-South axis especially lies in providing contextualized global evidence regarding protecting HCWs as a pandemic emerges, particularly with bi-directional cross-jurisdiction participation by researchers working with practitioners.

Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute?

[ABSTRACT]. Objectives. To ascertain whether and how working as a partnership of two World Health Organization collabo- rating centres (WHOCCs), based respectively in the Global North and Global South, can add insights on “what works to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during a pandemic, in what contexts, using what mechanism, to achieve what outcome”. Methods. A realist synthesis of seven projects in this research program was carried out to characterize context (C) (including researcher positionality), mechanism (M) (including service relationships) and outcome (O) in each project. An assessment was then conducted of the role of the WHOCC partnership in each study and overall. Results. The research found that lower-resourced countries with higher economic disparity, including South Africa, incurred greater occupational health risk and had less acceptable measures to protect HCWs at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than higher-income more-equal counterpart countries. It showed that rig- orously adopting occupational health measures can indeed protect the healthcare workforce; training and preventive initiatives can reduce workplace stress; information systems are valued; and HCWs most at-risk (including care aides in the Canadian setting) can be readily identified to trigger adoption of protective actions. The C-M-O analysis showed that various ways of working through a WHOCC partnership not only enabled knowledge sharing, but allowed for triangulating results and, ultimately, initiatives for worker protection. Conclusions. The value of an international partnership on a North-South axis especially lies in providing con- textualized global evidence regarding protecting HCWs as a pandemic emerges, particularly with bi-directional cross-jurisdiction participation by researchers working with practitioners.

[RESUMEN]. Objetivos. Determinar si la asociación de dos centros colaboradores de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, ubicados uno en el hemisferio norte y el otro en el hemisferio sur, puede aportar información sobre “qué es necesario para proteger a los trabajadores de salud durante una pandemia, en qué contextos, con qué mecanismos, con el objetivo de lograr qué resultados”. Métodos. Se realizó una síntesis realista de siete proyectos en este programa de investigación para carac- terizar el contexto (C) (incluida la posición del investigador), el mecanismo (M) (incluidas las relaciones de servicio) y el resultado (R) en cada proyecto. A continuación, se realizó una evaluación del papel que desem- peñó la alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS en términos generales y en cada estudio. Resultados. En la investigación se encontró que los países de escasos recursos con mayor disparidad económica, como Sudáfrica, incurrieron en un mayor riesgo para la salud ocupacional y tenían medidas menos aceptables para proteger a los trabajadores de salud al inicio de la pandemia de COVID-19 que los países homólogos de mayores ingresos y mayor equidad. Se de mostró que la adopción rigurosa de medidas de salud ocupacional puede proteger al personal de salud; la capacitación y las iniciativas preventivas pueden reducir el estrés en el lugar de trabajo; los sistemas de información se consideran valiosos; y los trabajadores de salud de mayor riesgo (como los asistentes de atención en el entorno canadiense) pueden identificarse con facilidad para la adopción de medidas de protección. El análisis de C-M-R mostró que las diferentes formas de trabajar por medio de una alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS no solo facilitaron el inter- cambio de conocimientos, sino que además permitieron triangular los resultados y, en última instancia, las iniciativas para la protección de los trabajadores. Conclusiones. El valor de una alianza internacional radica especialmente en proporcionar evidencia mundial contextualizada sobre la protección de los trabajadores de salud cuando surge una situación de pandemia, particularmente con la participación bidireccional entre distintas jurisdicciones de investigadores que traba- jan con el personal de salud.

[RESUMO]. Objetivo. Determinar se, e como, o trabalho em parceria entre dois centros colaboradores da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), localizados no Norte e no Sul global, pode contribuir com conhecimento sobre “o que é eficaz para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde em uma pandemia, em que contextos, com que mecanismos e para obter quais resultados”. Métodos. Foi realizada uma síntese realista de sete projetos de pesquisa do programa da OMS para determi- nar o contexto (C) (incluindo a posicionalidade dos pesquisadores), o mecanismo (M) (incluindo as relações entre os serviços) e o resultado (O, do inglês outcome) de cada projeto e avaliar o papel da parceria entre os centros colaboradores em cada estudo e em geral. Resultados. Este estudo demonstrou que, nos países de baixa renda com maior desigualdade econômica (por exemplo, na África do Sul), o risco à saúde ocupacional foi maior e as medidas adotadas para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde na pandemia de COVID-19 foram menos adequadas em comparação ao obser- vado em países comparáveis de alta renda com menor desigualdade. Verificou-se que a adoção rigorosa de medidas de saúde ocupacional efetivamente protege os trabalhadores da saúde, e que iniciativas de pre- venção e capacitação dos profissionais reduzem o estresse no trabalho. Também se reconhece a importância dos sistemas de informação e que o pessoal com maior risco de exposição ao vírus (incluindo os cuidadores auxiliares, no caso do Canadá) pode ser prontamente identificado para que sejam adotadas medidas de proteção. A análise do tipo C-M-O indicou que as diferentes formas de trabalho em parceria entre os cen- tros colaboradores possibilitaram não apenas dividir conhecimentos, mas também compartilhar resultados e, sobretudo, iniciativas para a proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde. Conclusões. A parceria internacional no eixo Norte-Sul é particularmente importante para obter evidências globais contextualizadas relativas à proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde em uma situação de pandemia, com a participação bidirecional entre foros de pesquisadores que trabalham com o pessoal da saúde.

Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute? / Protección de los trabajadores de salud durante una pandemia: ¿qué puede aportar una alianza para la investigación entre centros colaboradores de la OMS? / Proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde em uma pandemia: qual seria a contribuição de uma parceria de pesquisa entre centros colaboradores da OMS?

ABSTRACT Objectives. To ascertain whether and how working as a partnership of two World Health Organization collaborating centres (WHOCCs), based respectively in the Global North and Global South, can add insights on "what works to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during a pandemic, in what contexts, using what mechanism, to achieve what outcome". Methods. A realist synthesis of seven projects in this research program was carried out to characterize context (C) (including researcher positionality), mechanism (M) (including service relationships) and outcome (O) in each project. An assessment was then conducted of the role of the WHOCC partnership in each study and overall. Results. The research found that lower-resourced countries with higher economic disparity, including South Africa, incurred greater occupational health risk and had less acceptable measures to protect HCWs at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than higher-income more-equal counterpart countries. It showed that rigorously adopting occupational health measures can indeed protect the healthcare workforce; training and preventive initiatives can reduce workplace stress; information systems are valued; and HCWs most at-risk (including care aides in the Canadian setting) can be readily identified to trigger adoption of protective actions. The C-M-O analysis showed that various ways of working through a WHOCC partnership not only enabled knowledge sharing, but allowed for triangulating results and, ultimately, initiatives for worker protection. Conclusions. The value of an international partnership on a North-South axis especially lies in providing contextualized global evidence regarding protecting HCWs as a pandemic emerges, particularly with bi-directional cross-jurisdiction participation by researchers working with practitioners.

RESUMEN Objetivos. Determinar si la asociación de dos centros colaboradores de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, ubicados uno en el hemisferio norte y el otro en el hemisferio sur, puede aportar información sobre "qué es necesario para proteger a los trabajadores de salud durante una pandemia, en qué contextos, con qué mecanismos, con el objetivo de lograr qué resultados". Métodos. Se realizó una síntesis realista de siete proyectos en este programa de investigación para caracterizar el contexto (C) (incluida la posición del investigador), el mecanismo (M) (incluidas las relaciones de servicio) y el resultado (R) en cada proyecto. A continuación, se realizó una evaluación del papel que desempeñó la alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS en términos generales y en cada estudio. Resultados. En la investigación se encontró que los países de escasos recursos con mayor disparidad económica, como Sudáfrica, incurrieron en un mayor riesgo para la salud ocupacional y tenían medidas menos aceptables para proteger a los trabajadores de salud al inicio de la pandemia de COVID-19 que los países homólogos de mayores ingresos y mayor equidad. Se de mostró que la adopción rigurosa de medidas de salud ocupacional puede proteger al personal de salud; la capacitación y las iniciativas preventivas pueden reducir el estrés en el lugar de trabajo; los sistemas de información se consideran valiosos; y los trabajadores de salud de mayor riesgo (como los asistentes de atención en el entorno canadiense) pueden identificarse con facilidad para la adopción de medidas de protección. El análisis de C-M-R mostró que las diferentes formas de trabajar por medio de una alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS no solo facilitaron el intercambio de conocimientos, sino que además permitieron triangular los resultados y, en última instancia, las iniciativas para la protección de los trabajadores. Conclusiones. El valor de una alianza internacional radica especialmente en proporcionar evidencia mundial contextualizada sobre la protección de los trabajadores de salud cuando surge una situación de pandemia, particularmente con la participación bidireccional entre distintas jurisdicciones de investigadores que trabajan con el personal de salud.

RESUMO Objetivo. Determinar se, e como, o trabalho em parceria entre dois centros colaboradores da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), localizados no Norte e no Sul global, pode contribuir com conhecimento sobre "o que é eficaz para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde em uma pandemia, em que contextos, com que mecanismos e para obter quais resultados". Métodos. Foi realizada uma síntese realista de sete projetos de pesquisa do programa da OMS para determinar o contexto (C) (incluindo a posicionalidade dos pesquisadores), o mecanismo (M) (incluindo as relações entre os serviços) e o resultado (O, do inglês outcome) de cada projeto e avaliar o papel da parceria entre os centros colaboradores em cada estudo e em geral. Resultados. Este estudo demonstrou que, nos países de baixa renda com maior desigualdade econômica (por exemplo, na África do Sul), o risco à saúde ocupacional foi maior e as medidas adotadas para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde na pandemia de COVID-19 foram menos adequadas em comparação ao observado em países comparáveis de alta renda com menor desigualdade. Verificou-se que a adoção rigorosa de medidas de saúde ocupacional efetivamente protege os trabalhadores da saúde, e que iniciativas de prevenção e capacitação dos profissionais reduzem o estresse no trabalho. Também se reconhece a importância dos sistemas de informação e que o pessoal com maior risco de exposição ao vírus (incluindo os cuidadores auxiliares, no caso do Canadá) pode ser prontamente identificado para que sejam adotadas medidas de proteção. A análise do tipo C-M-O indicou que as diferentes formas de trabalho em parceria entre os centros colaboradores possibilitaram não apenas dividir conhecimentos, mas também compartilhar resultados e, sobretudo, iniciativas para a proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde. Conclusões. A parceria internacional no eixo Norte-Sul é particularmente importante para obter evidências globais contextualizadas relativas à proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde em uma situação de pandemia, com a participação bidirecional entre foros de pesquisadores que trabalham com o pessoal da saúde.

The experience of a regional network of health policy and systems actors in translating evidence into policy and action in West Africa.

Objectives: To identify strategies and interventions to strengthen the generation and use of research evidence in health policy and practice decision-making and implementation in the West African sub-region (knowledge translation). Design: The study design was cross-sectional. Data sources were from a desk review, West African Network of Emerging Leaders (WANEL) member brainstorming, and group discussion outputs from WANEL members and session participants' discussions and reflections during an organised session at the 2019 African Health Economics and Policy Association meeting in Accra. Results: Strategies and interventions identified included developing a Community of Practice, a repository of health policy and systems research (HPSR) evidence, stakeholder mapping, and engagement for action, advocacy, and partnership. Approaches for improving evidence uptake beyond traditional knowledge translation activities included the use of cultural considerations in presenting research results and mentoring younger people, the presentation of results in the form of solutions to political problems for decision-makers, and the use of research results as advocacy tools by civil society organisations. Development of skills in stakeholder mapping, advocacy, effective presentation of research results, leadership skills, networking, and network analysis for researchers was also identified as important. Conclusions: To strengthen the generation and use of research evidence in health policy and practice decision-making in West Africa requires capacity building and multiple interventions targeted synergistically at researchers, decision-makers, and practitioners. Funding: Funding for the study was provided by the COMPCAHSS project (#108237) supported by IDRC.

Infection control, occupational and public health measures including mRNA-based vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infections to protect healthcare workers from variants of concern: A 14-month observational study using surveillance data.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated measures to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) in Vancouver, Canada, where variants of concern (VOC) went from <1% VOC in February 2021 to >92% in mid-May. Canada has amongst the longest periods between vaccine doses worldwide, despite Vancouver having the highest P.1 variant rate outside Brazil. METHODS: With surveillance data since the pandemic began, we tracked laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, positivity rates, and vaccine uptake in all 25,558 HCWs in Vancouver Coastal Health, by occupation and subsector, and compared to the general population. Cox regression modelling adjusted for age and calendar-time calculated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 in fully vaccinated (≥ 7 days post-second dose), partially vaccinated infection (after 14 days) and unvaccinated HCWs; we also compared with unvaccinated community members of the same age-range. FINDINGS: Only 3.3% of our HCWs became infected, mirroring community rates, with peak positivity of 9.1%, compared to 11.8% in the community. As vaccine coverage increased, SARS-CoV-2 infections declined significantly in HCWs, despite a surge with predominantly VOC; unvaccinated HCWs had an infection rate of 1.3/10,000 person-days compared to 0.89 for HCWs post first dose, and 0.30 for fully vaccinated HCWs. VE compared to unvaccinated HCWs was 37.2% (95% CI: 16.6-52.7%) 14 days post-first dose, 79.2% (CI: 64.6-87.8%) 7 days post-second dose; one dose provided significant protection against infection until at least day 42. Compared with community infection rates, VE after one dose was 54.7% (CI: 44.8-62.9%); and 84.8% (CI: 75.2-90.7%) when fully vaccinated. INTERPRETATION: Rigorous droplet-contact precautions with N95s for aerosol-generating procedures are effective in preventing occupational infection in HCWs, with one dose of mRNA vaccination further reducing infection risk despite VOC and transmissibility concerns. Delaying second doses to allow more widespread vaccination against severe disease, with strict public health, occupational health and infection control measures, has been effective in protecting the healthcare workforce.

The midwives service scheme: a qualitative comparison of contextual determinants of the performance of two states in central Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: The federal government of Nigeria started the Midwives Service Scheme in 2009 to address the scarcity of skilled health workers in rural communities by temporarily redistributing midwives from urban to rural communities. The scheme was designed as a collaboration among federal, state and local governments. Six years on, this study examines the contextual factors that account for the differences in performance of the scheme in Benue and Kogi, two contiguous states in central Nigeria. METHODS: We obtained qualitative data through 14 in-depth interviews and 2 focus group discussions: 14 government officials at the federal, state and local government levels were interviewed to explore their perceptions on the design, implementation and sustainability of the Midwives Service Scheme. In addition, mothers in rural communities participated in 2 focus group discussions (one in each state) to elicit their views on Midwives Service Scheme services. The qualitative data were analysed for themes. RESULTS: The inability of the federal government to substantially influence the health care agenda of sub-national governments was a significant impediment to the achievement of the objectives of the Midwives Service Scheme. Participants identified differences in government prioritisation of primary health care between Benue and Kogi as relevant to maternal and child health outcomes in those states: Kogi was far more supportive of the Midwives Service Scheme and primary health care more broadly. High user fees in Benue was a significant barrier to the uptake of available maternal and child health services. CONCLUSION: Differential levels of political support and prioritisation, alongside financial barriers, contribute substantially to the uptake of maternal and child health services. For collaborative health sector strategies to gain sufficient traction, where federating units determine their health care priorities, they must be accompanied by strong and enforceable commitment by sub-national governments.