A novel approach to improve influenza vaccination rates among health care professionals: a prospective randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT Although influenza is the leading infections cause of death in the United States, only 40% of health care workers (HCW) comply with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendation for routine influenza vaccination.
This study investigated a novel approach for improving influenza vaccination rates among HCW. Eight hundred employees we selected, 200 each from the following 4 categories: professional staff, resident physicians, registered nurses, and licensed practical nurses. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive (1) no intervention, (2) a letter explaining the importance of influenza vaccine for HCW, (3) a ticket activated with influenza vaccine administration for a raffle of a free Caribbean vacation for 2, or (4) both the educational letter and the raffle ticket. We compared the proportion of employees receiving vaccination and participating in the raffle across groups.
The influenza vaccination rate for all study subjects was 41%. The number of subjects receiving vaccine did not differ by occupation (P = .87) or intervention group (P = .66).
This study provides no evidence to support the use of mailed educational letters or a single large raffle prize incentive as a means to boost hospital employee influenza vaccination rates.
SourceAvailable from: Birthe A Lehmann[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Influenza vaccination uptake of healthcare personnel is low in Europe.•Positive attitudes predict a high intention to receive influenza vaccination.•Attitude mediates the effect of moral norms on intention to vaccinate.•Intention to get vaccinated against influenza is a good predictor of immunization.•Indecisive healthcare personnel are a promising group for vaccination campaigns.Vaccine 10/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.10.034 · 3.49 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: : Influenza vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) is recommended to prevent the transmission of influenza to vulnerable patients. Nevertheless, vaccination coverage rates of HCWs in European countries have been low.Journal of Hospital Infection 12/2014; 89(3). DOI:10.1016/j.jhin.2014.11.009 · 2.78 Impact Factor
Technical Report: STRATEGIES FOR ADDRESSING VACCINE HESITANCY – A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of the systematic review of strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy is to identify strategies that have been implemented and evaluated across diverse global contexts in an effort to respond to, and manage, issues of vaccine hesitancy. This is to fulfil the requirements of the SAGE working group (WG) dealing with vaccine hesitancy in respect to: a) identifying existing and new activities and strategies relating to vaccines or from other areas that could successfully address vaccine hesitancy; b) identifying strategies that do not work well, and; c) prioritising activities and strategies based on an assessment of their potential impact. These requirements were translated into the following specific objectives: 1. Identify published strategies related to vaccine hesitancy and hesitancy of other health technologies (reproductive health technologies (RHT) were chosen as the additional focus) and provide a descriptive analysis of the findings; 2. Map all evaluated strategies to the SAGE WG “Model of determinants of Vaccine Hesitancy” (Appendix 1) and identify key characteristics; 3. Evaluate relevant evaluated strategies relating to vaccine hesitancy using GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation); relevance was informed by the PICO questions defined a priori by the WG, and; 4. Synthesise findings in a manner which aids the design of future interventions and further research.