- Email: [email protected]
Motivators and Barriers to pH1N1 Vaccine Uptake among Healthcare Workers
www.ajicjournal.org Vol. 39 No. 5
E75
Presentation Number 12-120
Motivators and Barriers to pH1N1 Vaccine Uptake among Healthcare Workers Kimberly M. Corace, PhD, Assistant Professor; Chathura B. Prematunga, BSc, MSc, Epidemiology candidate, University of Ottawa at the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Anne E. McCarthy, MD, MSc, Associate Professor, University of Ottawa at The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Virginia R. Roth, MD, Associate Professor, University of Ottawa at the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Thomas Hayes, BASc, Director, OHSEP, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Kathryn N. Suh, MD, MSc, Louise Balfour, PhD, Assistant Professor; Gary E. Garber, MD, Professor; University of Ottawa at the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada Background/Objectives: Maintaining the health and availability of Healthcare Workers (HCW) is an essential component of pandemic preparedness. A key to protecting HCW is the pH1N1 flu vaccination. However, the number of HCW who get the flu vaccine falls well below the public health target of 90%. Last year a mass pH1N1 vaccination campaign was launched at our hospital, yet 30% of staff refused vaccination. This study examined the motivators and barriers influencing pH1N1 vaccination among HCW in order to design and implement more effective vaccine campaigns. Methods: This study was conducted at one of the largest tertiary care hospitals in Canada. Information was compiled on staffs’ vaccine uptake during the pH1N1 vaccination roll-out, and Occupational Health and Safety housed a list of staffs’ vaccination status. Using this list, staff were recruited by mass mail out of a survey, and 3260 participants (2848 who received the pH1N1 vaccine and 412 who refused) completed measures of demographics, pH1N1 vaccine knowledge and attitudes, and motivation for vaccine uptake or refusal. Descriptive statistics were computed to examine demographics. Independent sample t-tests were used to examine differences between vaccine accepters and refusers. Results: Compared to HCW who received the vaccine, HCW who refused the vaccine were less likely to believe that (1) the vaccine was safe, (2) the vaccine would prevent themselves, family members and patients from getting pH1N1, and (3) they were at risk of pH1N1 (p ,.001). HCW who refused vaccination were less likely to report that their supervisors and colleagues encouraged them to get vaccinated (p ,.001). No significant differences were found between vaccine accepters and refusers in terms of fear of needles, not having time to receive vaccination, or disliking injections (p ..05). Conclusions: Results identified fundamental reasons why a core group of HCW refused vaccination and provide direction for future vaccination campaigns. Creating a culture of vaccine promotion in the workplace, characterized by strong messaging from HCW supervisors and colleagues to enhance vaccine uptake, is important. This work will impact the local and national pandemic vaccine and other influenza vaccine campaign strategies targeted at HCW; thus, helping HCW stay healthy and reducing the impact of influenza on healthcare organizations and patients.
Presentation Number 12-121
Voluntary Employee Influenza Vaccination with Mandatory Mask Use: A New Paradigm James Marx, RN, MS, CIC, Infection Preventionist; Rudy Gastelum, RN, FNP, Employee Health Service Director; Tri-City Medical Center, Oceanside, Ca Issue: Hospital health care worker influenza rates are now publicly reported in California. In 2009, the Statewide mean vaccination rate was 55.0%. In 2010, the seasonal vaccination rate increased to 62.2% and the H1N1 vaccinate rate was 55.5%. Project: At our hospital, the health care worker influenza vaccination rates have been consistently below 68% for the past five years. After considering a mandatory influenza vaccination policy, we decided to leave the voluntary vaccination policy in place, but required all non-vaccinated employees to wear a mask while on duty in the hospital for the duration of the influenza season.
E75
Presentation Number 12-120
Motivators and Barriers to pH1N1 Vaccine Uptake among Healthcare Workers Kimberly M. Corace, PhD, Assistant Professor; Chathura B. Prematunga, BSc, MSc, Epidemiology candidate, University of Ottawa at the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Anne E. McCarthy, MD, MSc, Associate Professor, University of Ottawa at The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Virginia R. Roth, MD, Associate Professor, University of Ottawa at the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Thomas Hayes, BASc, Director, OHSEP, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Kathryn N. Suh, MD, MSc, Louise Balfour, PhD, Assistant Professor; Gary E. Garber, MD, Professor; University of Ottawa at the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada Background/Objectives: Maintaining the health and availability of Healthcare Workers (HCW) is an essential component of pandemic preparedness. A key to protecting HCW is the pH1N1 flu vaccination. However, the number of HCW who get the flu vaccine falls well below the public health target of 90%. Last year a mass pH1N1 vaccination campaign was launched at our hospital, yet 30% of staff refused vaccination. This study examined the motivators and barriers influencing pH1N1 vaccination among HCW in order to design and implement more effective vaccine campaigns. Methods: This study was conducted at one of the largest tertiary care hospitals in Canada. Information was compiled on staffs’ vaccine uptake during the pH1N1 vaccination roll-out, and Occupational Health and Safety housed a list of staffs’ vaccination status. Using this list, staff were recruited by mass mail out of a survey, and 3260 participants (2848 who received the pH1N1 vaccine and 412 who refused) completed measures of demographics, pH1N1 vaccine knowledge and attitudes, and motivation for vaccine uptake or refusal. Descriptive statistics were computed to examine demographics. Independent sample t-tests were used to examine differences between vaccine accepters and refusers. Results: Compared to HCW who received the vaccine, HCW who refused the vaccine were less likely to believe that (1) the vaccine was safe, (2) the vaccine would prevent themselves, family members and patients from getting pH1N1, and (3) they were at risk of pH1N1 (p ,.001). HCW who refused vaccination were less likely to report that their supervisors and colleagues encouraged them to get vaccinated (p ,.001). No significant differences were found between vaccine accepters and refusers in terms of fear of needles, not having time to receive vaccination, or disliking injections (p ..05). Conclusions: Results identified fundamental reasons why a core group of HCW refused vaccination and provide direction for future vaccination campaigns. Creating a culture of vaccine promotion in the workplace, characterized by strong messaging from HCW supervisors and colleagues to enhance vaccine uptake, is important. This work will impact the local and national pandemic vaccine and other influenza vaccine campaign strategies targeted at HCW; thus, helping HCW stay healthy and reducing the impact of influenza on healthcare organizations and patients.
Presentation Number 12-121
Voluntary Employee Influenza Vaccination with Mandatory Mask Use: A New Paradigm James Marx, RN, MS, CIC, Infection Preventionist; Rudy Gastelum, RN, FNP, Employee Health Service Director; Tri-City Medical Center, Oceanside, Ca Issue: Hospital health care worker influenza rates are now publicly reported in California. In 2009, the Statewide mean vaccination rate was 55.0%. In 2010, the seasonal vaccination rate increased to 62.2% and the H1N1 vaccinate rate was 55.5%. Project: At our hospital, the health care worker influenza vaccination rates have been consistently below 68% for the past five years. After considering a mandatory influenza vaccination policy, we decided to leave the voluntary vaccination policy in place, but required all non-vaccinated employees to wear a mask while on duty in the hospital for the duration of the influenza season.