RESUMO
BackgroundHealthcare personnel (HCP) are prioritized for earliest SARS-CoV-2 vaccine administration, yet relatively few data exist on HCPs knowledge, motivations, concerns, and intentions regarding COVID-19 vaccines. MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey Nov.16-Dec.8, 2020 among HCP enrolled in a cohort study at three Northern California medical centers serving diverse roles including COVID-19 patient care. Eligible HCP were adult (age[≥]18) on-site employees of the University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco General Hospital, and Stanford Healthcare. A one-time electronically-administered survey was sent to cohort HCP on November 16, 2020 and responses analyzed. ResultsOverall, among 2,448 HCP invited, 2,135 completed the COVID-19 vaccine survey (87.2% response rate). HCPs had mean age 41 years, were 73% female, and had diverse jobs including COVID-19 patient contact. Enthusiasm for vaccination was overall strong, and more HCP (1,453, 69%) said they would definitely/likely receive vaccine if formally FDA-approved versus if approved via emergency use authorization only (785, 35%). While 541 (25%) respondents wanted to be among the earliest to receive vaccine, more desired vaccination after the first round (777, 36%) or >2 months after vaccinations began (389, 18%). Top factors increasing motivation for vaccination included perceiving risk from COVID-19 to self (1,382, 65%) or to family/friends (1355, 63%). Top concerns were vaccine side effects, cited by 596 (28%), and concerns about political involvement in FDAs approval process (249, 12%). ConclusionsHCP were enthusiastic about COVID-19 vaccination for individual protection and protecting others, but harbored concerns about vaccine side effects. Our data may inform emerging vaccine education campaigns. Key PointsAmong 2,135 healthcare personnel surveyed, we found enthusiasm for COVID-19 vaccination both for individual benefit and protecting others. However, healthcare personnel rated their knowledge of COVID-19 vaccines as only moderate and harbored concerns about vaccine side effects. Education raising awareness of vaccine efficacy and side effects may help maximize vaccine uptake.
RESUMO
Policies to promote social distancing can minimize COVID-19 transmission, but come with substantial social and economic costs. Quantifying relative preferences of the public for such practices can inform policy prioritization and optimize uptake. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to quantify relative "utilities" (preferences) for five COVID-19 pandemic social distances strategies (e.g., closure of restaurants, restriction of large gatherings) against the hypothetical risk of acquiring COVID-19 and anticipated income loss. The survey was distributed in Missouri in May-June, 2020. We applied inverse probability sampling weights to mixed logit and latent class models to generate mean preferences and identify preference classes. Overall (n=2,428), the strongest preference was for the prohibition of large gatherings, followed by preferences to keep outdoor venues, schools, and social and lifestyle venues open, 75% of the population showing probable support for a strategy that prohibited large gatherings and closed lifestyle and social venues. Latent class analysis, however revealed four preference sub-groups in the population - "risk eliminators", "risk balancers", "altruistic" and "risk takers", with men twice as likely as women to belong to the risk-taking group. In this setting, public health policies which as a first phase prohibit large gatherings, as well as close social and lifestyle venues may be acceptable and adhered to by the public. In addition, policy messages that address preference heterogeneity, for example by targeting public health messages at men, could improve adherence to social distancing measures and prevent further COVID-19 transmission prior to vaccine distribution and in the event of future pandemics. Significance StatementPreferences drive behavior - DCEs are a novel tool in public health that allow examination of preferences for a product, service or policy, identifying how the public prioritizes personal risks and cost in relation to health behaviors. Using this method to establish preferences for COVID-19 mitigation strategies, our results suggest that, firstly, a tiered approach to non-essential business closures where large gatherings are prohibited and social and lifestyle venues are closed as a first phase, would be well aligned with population preferences and may be supported by the public, while school and outdoor venue closures may require more consideration prior to a second phase of restrictions. And secondly, that important distinct preference phenotypes - that are not captured by sociodemographic (e.g., age, sex, race) characteristics - exist, and therefore that messaging should be target at such subgroups to enhance adherence to prevention efforts.
