Nurses' knowledge and risk perception towards seasonal influenza and vaccination and their vaccination behaviours: A cross-sectional survey
Seasonal influenza has become a serious public health problem worldwide and vaccination is recognized as the most effective preventative measure. Healthcare workers can be the vectors of influenza outbreaks. Data suggest that nurses' vaccination remains suboptimal worldwide.
To explore the relationship among nurses' knowledge, risk perception and their vaccination behaviours and the reasons for vaccination uptake.
A cross-sectional survey.
Participants were recruited from the nurses enrolled on continuing professional education courses at a large university in London.
A sample of 522 nurses returned completed questionnaires (response rate 77.7%). Most of the respondents were women, worked in hospitals and had direct patient contact. The mean years qualified as a nurse were 11.9 ± 8.75 years.
The survey instrument examined nurses' knowledge about influenza and vaccination, risk perception towards influenza and pandemics, vaccination behaviours and reasons for vaccination acceptance or refusal. The survey also collected data regarding gender, age, highest educational qualification, work place, clinical specialty, qualified years as a nurse, and whether they had direct patient contact.
The influenza vaccination rate among the respondents was 36% with about 41% never vaccinated. Nurses with a high knowledge level were more likely to get vaccinated compared to those with a low knowledge level (p<0.001). Vaccination rates between the high risk perception and low risk perception groups were different (p=0.019). Sentinel knowledge items were associated with nurses' vaccination status. Several risk perception items including personal vulnerability to influenza or H1N1, mortality risk of H1N1, and the likelihood of transmitting influenza to patients were also predictors of vaccination uptake. Vaccinated nurses were more likely to recommend vaccination to their patients (p<0.001). The most frequent reason for vaccination refusal was concern about the side-effects of the vaccination while self-protection was the most frequent reason for vaccination uptake.
This study confirmed a relationship between knowledge, risk perception and vaccination behaviours among nurses. The identified sentinel items of knowledge and risk perception could inform future vaccination campaigns. The clinical specialty of nurses and the importance of accessibility to vaccination as predictors of vaccine uptake require further exploration.
Available from: Kyung Taek Rim
- "HCWs can be the vectors of influenza and cause influenza outbreaks. Data suggested that vaccination of nurses remains suboptimal worldwide . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Because information on biological agents in the workplace is lacking, biological hazard analyses at the workplace to securely recognize the harmful factors with biological basis are desperately needed. This review concentrates on literatures published after 2010 that attempted to detect biological hazards to humans, especially workers, and the efforts to protect them against these factors. It is important to improve the current understanding of the health hazards caused by biological factors at the workplace. In addition, this review briefly describes these factors and provides some examples of their adverse health effects. It also reviews risk assessments, protection with personal protective equipment, prevention with training of workers, regulations, as well as vaccinations.
Safety and Health at Work 06/2014; 5(2):43-52. DOI:10.1016/j.shaw.2014.03.006
Available from: Helen Sisson
- "However, the aspect of the instrument which measures vaccination behaviours addresses not only personal vaccination but also the recommendation of vaccination to patients. In a previous study by Zhang et al. (2011), it was found that nurses were more likely to recommend vaccination to their patients if they had been vaccinated themselves. Having made a connection between personal attitudes and subsequent practice, the relevance of the sample upon which the instrument was tested must be considered. "
Journal of Clinical Nursing 01/2014; 23(1-2):296-7. DOI:10.1111/jocn.12099 · 1.26 Impact Factor
Available from: Jon Tilburt
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Though recommended by many and mandated by some, influenza vaccination rates among health care workers, even in pandemics, remain below optimal levels. The objective of this study was to assess vaccination uptake, attitudes, and distinguishing characteristics (including doctor-nurse differences) of health care workers who did and did not receive the pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine in late 2009.
In early 2010 we mailed a self-administered survey to 800 physicians and 800 nurses currently licensed and practicing in Minnesota. 1,073 individuals responded (cooperation rate: 69%). 85% and 62% of Minnesota physicians and nurses, respectively, reported being vaccinated. Accurately estimating the risk of vaccine side effects (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.5-2.7), agreeing with a professional obligation to be vaccinated (OR 10.1; 95% CI 7.1-14.2), an ethical obligation to follow public health authorities' recommendations (OR 9.9; 95% CI 6.6-14.9), and laws mandating pandemic vaccination (OR 3.1; 95% CI 2.3-4.1) were all independently associated with receiving the H1N1 influenza vaccine.
While a majority of health care workers in one midwestern state reported receiving the pandemic H1N1 vaccine, physicians and nurses differed significantly in vaccination uptake. Several key attitudes and perceptions may influence health care workers' decisions regarding vaccination. These data inform how states might optimally enlist health care workers' support in achieving vaccination goals during a pandemic.
PLoS ONE 12/2011; 6(12):e29478. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0029478 · 3.23 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.