Nurses' knowledge and risk perception towards seasonal influenza and vaccination and their vaccination behaviours: a cross-sectional survey.
ABSTRACT 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.
- SourceAvailable from: Kyung Taek Rim[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.06/2014; 5(2):43-52. DOI:10.1016/j.shaw.2014.03.006
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A growing body of literature defends the efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccination for health care workers in reducing the mortality of hospitalized patients. I review the evidence concerning influenza vaccination, concluding that universal vaccination of health care workers against influenza should be considered standard patient care and that nonvaccination represents maleficent care. I further argue that the ethical responsibility to ensure universal vaccination of staff against seasonal influenza lies not only with individual health care providers but with each individual health care institution. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print December 12, 2013: e1-e6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301514).American Journal of Public Health 12/2013; 104(11). DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301514 · 4.23 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In the past two decades, childhood vaccination coverage has increased dramatically, averting an estimated 2-3 million deaths per year. Adult vaccination coverage, however, remains inconsistently recorded and substandard. Although structural barriers are known to limit coverage, social and psychological factors can also affect vaccine uptake. Previous qualitative studies have explored beliefs, attitudes and preferences associated with seasonal influenza (flu) vaccination uptake, yet little research has investigated how participants' context and experiences influence their vaccination decision-making process over time. This paper aims to provide a detailed account of a mixed methods approach designed to understand the wider constellation of social and psychological factors likely to influence adult vaccination decisions, as well as the context in which these decisions take place, in the USA, the UK, France, India, China and Brazil. We employ a combination of qualitative interviewing approaches to reach a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing vaccination decisions, specifically seasonal flu and tetanus. To elicit these factors, we developed the journey to vaccination, a new qualitative approach anchored on the heuristics and biases tradition and the customer journey mapping approach. A purposive sampling strategy is used to select participants who represent a range of key sociodemographic characteristics. Thematic analysis will be used to analyse the data. Typical journeys to vaccination will be proposed. Vaccination uptake is significantly influenced by social and psychological factors, some of which are under-reported and poorly understood. This research will provide a deeper understanding of the barriers and drivers to adult vaccination. Our findings will be published in relevant peer-reviewed journals and presented at academic conferences. They will also be presented as practical recommendations at policy and industry meetings and healthcare professionals' forums. This research was approved by relevant local ethics committees.BMJ Open 01/2014; 4(1):e004279. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004279 · 2.06 Impact Factor