B A Lehmann1, R A C Ruiter2, D van Dam3, S Wicker4, G Kok2. 1. Department of Work and Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: birthe.lehmann@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Department of Work and Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 3. Orbis Medisch en Zorgconcern, Sittard, The Netherlands. 4. Betriebsärztlicher Dienst, Klinikum der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 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. AIM: To investigate the relative and combined strength of sociocognitive variables, from past research, theory and a qualitative study, in explaining the motivation of HCWs to receive the influenza vaccine. METHODS: An anonymous, online questionnaire was distributed among HCWs in hospital settings in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands between February and April 2013. FINDINGS: Attitude and past vaccination uptake explained a considerable amount of variance in the intention of HCWs to receive the influenza vaccine. Moreover, low perceived social norms, omission bias, low moral norms, being older, having no patient contact, and being Belgian or Dutch (compared with German) increased the probability of having no intention to receive the influenza vaccine compared with being undecided about vaccination. High intention to receive the influenza vaccine was shown to be more likely than being undecided about vaccination when HCWs had high perceived susceptibility of contracting influenza, low naturalistic views, and lower motivation to receive the vaccine solely for self-protection. CONCLUSION: Country-specific interventions and a focus on different sociocognitive variables depending on the intention/lack of intention of HCWs to receive the influenza vaccine may be beneficial to promote vaccination uptake.
BACKGROUND: 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. AIM: To investigate the relative and combined strength of sociocognitive variables, from past research, theory and a qualitative study, in explaining the motivation of HCWs to receive the influenza vaccine. METHODS: An anonymous, online questionnaire was distributed among HCWs in hospital settings in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands between February and April 2013. FINDINGS: Attitude and past vaccination uptake explained a considerable amount of variance in the intention of HCWs to receive the influenza vaccine. Moreover, low perceived social norms, omission bias, low moral norms, being older, having no patient contact, and being Belgian or Dutch (compared with German) increased the probability of having no intention to receive the influenza vaccine compared with being undecided about vaccination. High intention to receive the influenza vaccine was shown to be more likely than being undecided about vaccination when HCWs had high perceived susceptibility of contracting influenza, low naturalistic views, and lower motivation to receive the vaccine solely for self-protection. CONCLUSION: Country-specific interventions and a focus on different sociocognitive variables depending on the intention/lack of intention of HCWs to receive the influenza vaccine may be beneficial to promote vaccination uptake.
Authors: Matthew M Walsh; Andrew M Parker; Raffaele Vardavas; Sarah A Nowak; David P Kennedy; Courtney A Gidengil Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2020-10-01
Authors: Hadia Hussain; Allison McGeer; Shelly McNeil; Kevin Katz; Mark Loeb; Andrew Simor; Jeff Powis; Joanne Langley; Matthew Muller; Brenda L Coleman Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: P Durando; C Alicino; G Dini; I Barberis; A M Bagnasco; R Iudici; M Zanini; M Martini; A Toletone; C Paganino; E Massa; A Orsi; L Sasso Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 2.692