Let's talk about COVID-19 vaccination: Relevance of conversations about COVID-19 vaccination and information sources on vaccination intention in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is known to be more pronounced among young people. However, there are a lack of studies examining determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intention in the general population in this young age-group in Switzerland, and in particular, studies investigating the influence of information sources and social networks on vaccination intention are missing. METHODS: The cross-sectional study "COVIDisc - Discussion with young people about the corona pandemic" provided the opportunity to investigate COVID-19 vaccination intention in 893 individuals aged 15-34 years from the cantons of Zurich, Thurgau, and Ticino in Switzerland. An online survey was administered between 10 November 2020 and 5 January 2021. Associations of public information sources and conversations about COVID-19 with COVID-19 vaccination intention were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression and mediation analysis using generalized structural equation modeling. RESULTS: 51.5% of the participants intended or probably intended to get vaccinated once the vaccine would be available. Using print or online news (AOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.09-2.07) as an information source and having conversations about the COVID-19 vaccine (AOR 2.09, 95% CI 1.52-2.87) increased participants' COVID-19 vaccination intention. The effects of female gender (b = -0.267, p = 0.039) and risk perception (b = 0.163, p = 0.028) were partially mediated by having conversations about the COVID-19 vaccine. The effects of age (b = -0.036, p = 0.016), secondary educational level (b = 0.541, p = 0.010) and tertiary educational level (b = 0.726, p = 0.006) were fully mediated via having conversations about the COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Conversations and campaigns should start even before vaccines become available. Our data support interventions for young women and less educated people using social norms and supporting information seeking with news. Trust and risk perceptions are essential foundations for vaccine intentions.

Young people's media use and adherence to preventive measures in the "infodemic": Is it masked by political ideology?

BACKGROUND: Navigating in the COVID-19 "infodemic" and adhering to preventive measures is especially challenging for young people. The use of information sources and political ideology are empirically important factors for adherence behavior. How these two are interconnected and if political ideology on its own contributes to adherence is not yet well established in young people. OBJECTIVE: This study investigates what role political ideology and political extremism, use of information sources, trust and risk perception play for adhering to preventive measures in young people. METHODS: Cross-sectional online survey in a representative random sample of young people aged 15-34 in two German-speaking and one Italian-speaking canton of Switzerland. The hypotheses were tested with logistic regression and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: The odds for using the following information sources decreases for young people positioning themselves towards the right pole of the ideology scale: health-based sources 0.90 (CI: 0.84-0.97), news sources 0.93 (CI 0.87-0.997) and other websites 0.83 (CI: 0.75-0.92). In contrast, the odds of using broadcasting sources increases for young people positioning themselves towards the right pole of the ideology scale (OR: 1.08, CI 1.01-1.15). The odds of using social media decreases with higher political extremism (OR 0.88, CI 0.78-0.99). Political extremism was related with lower adherence to preventive measures in young people with low trust in the government, scientists, and journalists. CONCLUSION: Young peoples' use of information sources is associated with their political ideology and political extremism needs to be taken in account in conjunction with low trust.

Health Care Professionals' Interest in Vaccination Training in Switzerland: A Quantitative Survey.

Objectives: Health care professionals (HCPs) play an important role for patients' vaccination decisions. To counsel patients/clients appropriately, HCPs need current factual knowledge about vaccines and strong communication skills. Methods: We conducted an online survey with physicians, pharmacists, nurses, and midwives in Switzerland (01.11.2020-31.03.2021). We evaluated: 1) interest in vaccination knowledge and counseling training; 2) vaccination recommendation practices; 3) experience with vaccination counseling/administration; 4) comfort level in addressing vaccine hesitancy (VH); 5) perspectives on patient/client VH, delays, and refusals. Results: In total, 1,933 practicing HCPs responded (496 physicians, 226 pharmacists, 607 nurses, 604 midwives). 43% physicians, 31% pharmacists, 15% nurses, and 23% midwives felt comfortable counseling VH patients/clients. 96% physicians, 98% pharmacists, 85% nurses, and 91% midwives were interested in additional vaccination-related training. All professionals mentioned safety, efficacy, and side effects as topics of most interest for additional training. Conclusion: Results demonstrate a high interest among HCPs for additional vaccination-related training. In addition to factual information about vaccination, such training will likely benefit from a communication component, given the low rates of comfort reported by HCPs when counseling VH patients/clients.

Healthcare professional and professional stakeholders' perspectives on vaccine mandates in Switzerland: A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: There currently are no mandatory vaccines in Switzerland. However, Swiss federal legislation allows for vaccination mandates in settings where the risk of transmission to vulnerable groups is high, such as healthcare professionals (HCPs) working with vulnerable patients. Since HCPs are trusted information sources, a priority population for COVID-19 vaccination, and potentially subjected to mandates, we investigated HCP perspectives on mandates. METHODS: A national online survey was administered to HCPs (October 2020-March 2021), including vaccine mandates questions concerning patients (measles) and HCPs (influenza). We qualitatively investigated HCP mandate perspectives through: (1) 34 interviews with HCPs, HCP professional society representatives, and health authorities; (2) a focus group discussion (FGD) with complementary medicine (CM) and biomedical physicians, and Swiss Federal Vaccination Commission members. RESULTS: 1933 participants (496 physicians, 226 pharmacists, 607 nurses, 604 midwives) responded to the survey. Quantitative results show all professional groups preferred shared parent-HCP measles vaccine decisions (65%, 54%, 50%, 48%, respectively; p for trend < 0.001). Midwives (87%) and nurses (70%) preferred individual influenza vaccination decisions for HCPs, while physicians (49%) and pharmacists (44%) preferred shared employee-employer decisions (p for trend < 0.001). Physicians (p < .001) and pharmacists (p < .01) with CM training favored individual influenza vaccination decisions. Qualitative results show general HCP opposition to vaccine mandates, mainly because participants argued how other approaches, such as HCP training and better information, could encourage uptake. Arguments against COVID-19 mandates included insufficiently documented long-term safety/efficacy data. From participants' perspectives, mandated vaccination should be used as a last resort. Some participants expressed fear that with mandates, notably for influenza and COVID-19, some HCPs might leave their jobs. HCPs were unsure what vaccine mandates would concretely look like in practice, particularly regarding sanctions for non-compliance and enforcement. CONCLUSION: In Switzerland, HCPs generally were opposed to vaccination mandates. Clarity and guidance are needed from health authorities to better inform discussions around vaccine mandates.