Next Article in Journal
Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension in the United Arab Emirates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Perception of Stress and Styles of Coping with It in Parents Giving Kangaroo Mother Care to Their Children during Hospitalization in NICU
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 18
Issue 23
10.3390/ijerph182312695
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination among Healthcare and Non-Healthcare Workers of Hospitals and Outpatient Clinics in the Northern Region of Slovakia

by
Romana Ulbrichtova
1,
Viera Svihrova
1,*,
Maria Tatarkova
1,
Henrieta Hudeckova
1 and
Jan Svihra
2
1
Department of Public Health, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Mala Hora 11149/4B, 036 01 Martin, Slovakia
2
Clinic of Urology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Kollarova 2, 036 59 Martin, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(23), 12695; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312695
Submission received: 25 October 2021 / Revised: 22 November 2021 / Accepted: 30 November 2021 / Published: 2 December 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Global Health)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The purpose of this study was to analyse attitudes, motivation, and reasons for hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs) in northern Slovakia. A cross-sectional study was conducted between 30 August 2021 and 30 September 2021. An anonymous questionnaire was administered. The study was completed by 1277 employees. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors of COVID-19 vaccination status. A total of 1076 (84.3%) were vaccinated, and 201 (15.7%) were unvaccinated. Physician job type (OR = 1.77; CI95 1.13–2.78), history of COVID-19 (OR = 0.37; CI95 0.26–0.37), influenza vaccination at any time (OR = 1.97; CI95 1.12–3.46), compulsory vaccination for HCWs (OR = 9.15; CI95 2.92–28.62), and compulsory vaccination for selected groups (OR = 9.71; CI95 2.75–34.31) were the predictors significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. Non-physician HCWs, employees in hospitals, and employees without a history of COVID-19 significantly more distrusted the efficacy of vaccines against COVID-19. Results of our study confirmed that physicians have higher vaccination rates and lower hesitance to get vaccinated than non-physician HCWs. HCWs play an important role in influencing vaccination decisions and can be helpful in vaccine advocacy to the general public.

1. Introduction

Since 11 March 2020, when the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a pandemic, healthcare priorities have changed [1]. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are considered the most important members for any healthcare system in the fight against COVID-19. We recorded a high morbidity and mortality rates among HCWs [2].
Ending the COVID-19 pandemic will require unprecedented collective action. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (handwashing, face masks, social distancing, travel restrictions, etc.) in combination with safe and effective vaccines and the implementation of global and national vaccination programmes are the only available tools to allow humanity to return to pre-pandemic life and to protect people against COVID-19 [3].
In the Slovak Republic (SR), from 3 January 2020 to 16 November 2021, there have been 1,020,022 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 13,644 deaths reported to the WHO. In the SR, vaccinations started on 26 December 2020. The Ministry of Health of the SR has presented 12 phases within the national vaccination programme, which clearly determine the order of vaccination. Vaccination among HCWs was in the first phase, and the country prioritised the vaccination of HCWs who were in contact with COVID-19 patients [4,5].
Currently, several COVID-19 vaccines are publicly available in the SR. Achieving collective immunity is a necessary step to end the pandemic. Mathematical models show that if the COVID-19 vaccine is 80% effective, then the coverage must be at least 75% to eliminate an ongoing pandemic [6]. Globally, there have been 3,223,744,666 persons fully vaccinated, and in the SR there have been 2,426,386 persons [4].
Therefore, it is extremely important to keep track of the public’s views on vaccination, especially the views on, and acceptance of, the vaccine among HCWs. Some countries have gradually introduced compulsory vaccination for selected population groups. The United Kingdom government recently introduced new legislation, effective 11 November 2021, that requires people working in care homes to be COVID-19 vaccinated [7]. Italy became the first country in Europe to make vaccination against COVID-19 mandatory for HCWs [8]. Subsequently, France and Greece followed Italy’s precedent [9].
The aim of this study was to analyse the attitudes, motivation, and reason for hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccination among HCWs and non-HCWs in hospitals and outpatient healthcare clinics in northern Slovakia.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Population

A cross-sectional study was conducted between 30 August and 30 September 2021 by administering an anonymous questionnaire distributed to individual e-mail addresses. We addressed all HCWs and non-HCWs belonging to hospitals and general and specialised outpatient healthcare clinics in northern Slovakia (n = 4268). Data were collected from physicians (n = 1455), non-physician HCWs (n = 2166), and non-HCWs (n = 647) [10]. Employees were instructed not to complete the questionnaire more than once. The study was completed by 1277 of 4268 employees from hospitals and general and specialised outpatient healthcare clinics. The employees who had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine were included in the vaccinated group (n = 1076). The employees who had not received any vaccine were included in the unvaccinated group (n = 201) (Figure 1).

2.2. Survey Questionnaire

A Microsoft Forms questionnaire was used, which was adopted from Stepanek et al. with their consent [11]. Socio-demographic characteristics were collected among all respondents. Motives for vaccination were collected only among vaccinated respondents. Reasons for hesitancy were collected only among unvaccinated respondents (Supplementary Materials Table S1).

2.3. Statistical Analyses

All statistical analyses were carried out using the software SPSS 24, R version 4.0.2, and EPI Info 7 using methods of descriptive statistics, including a chi-square test for pairwise comparisons [12]. Student’s t-test was used for comparison between two means for quantitative variables. Comparisons of fear levels were performed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA). Multivariate logistic analysis was performed for prediction of COVID-19 vaccination. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were used to identify statistically significant differences between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Binomial logistic regression was performed to examine the relationships between vaccine acceptance (being “vaccinated” or “unvaccinated” as a response variable) and other characteristics included in the responses of all employees (explanatory variables).

3. Results

A total of 4268 respondents were given questionnaires, and 1277 respondents were considered for the analysis, of which 1076 (84.3%) were vaccinated and 201 (15.7%) unvaccinated. Among vaccinated participants, 93.1% were physicians, 76.9% non-physician HCWs, and 76.5% non-HCWs. Among all vaccinated participants, 96.8% had received the Comirnaty vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech), 1.3% had received the Spivax (Moderna) vaccine, 1% had received the Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca) vaccine, 0.5% had received the Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) vaccine, and 0.4% had received the Sputnik vaccine. The median age was 48.3 years (range 19–87 years). The average years of work were 21.1 years (range 0–62), and 78.1% were female. Among all respondents in the study, 582 (45.6%) were physicians, 542 (42.4%) were non-physician HCWs, and 153 (11.9%) were non-HCWs. The socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are shown in Table 1.
The average age and the average job duration of vaccinated employees were higher compared to the unvaccinated. Unvaccinated participants showed a significantly lower level of fear (3.7 ± 2.4) than vaccinated participants (6.1 ± 2.7). More than 93% of total physicians were vaccinated. More than 27% of respondents (n = 354) reported to have had a previous infection from SARS-CoV-2 (Table 1).
When we performed multivariate logistic regression analysis, physician job type, compulsory vaccination for HCWs, and compulsory vaccination for selected groups were the predictors significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance (Figure 2).
Motives to be vaccinated against COVID-19 are shown in Table 2. The effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 during the performance of profession was a significantly stronger motivation for physicians than for non-physician HCWs.
Reasons for hesitancy to get vaccinated against COVID-19 are shown in Table 3. The top reasons for refusing vaccination were concerns about the side effects and concerns about efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine.
Table 4 display the attitudes towards compulsory vaccination for three groups: only HCWs, selected population groups, and the whole population. Physicians were more inclined to introduce compulsory vaccination for all three groups than non-physician HCWs (p < 0.001). Almost 65% of vaccinated physicians were agreeable towards introduction of compulsory vaccination among HCWs. Physicians play a significant role in influencing vaccination decisions.

4. Discussion

The B.1.617.2 (delta) variant was first detected in India in December 2020. It became the most commonly reported variant in the country starting in mid-April 2021 and has now been detected across the globe. Currently, the delta variant is responsible for a sharp increase in cases of COVID-19 disease [13]. To bring this pandemic to an end, a large share of the world needs to be immune to the virus. The safest way to achieve this is through vaccination. For this reason, vaccination together with other non-pharmacological interventions are necessary to protect people against COVID-19 and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines have been found to be highly efficacious at preventing symptomatic disease, as shown by clinical trials and real-world evidence [14,15].
The total number of people who have received at least one dose of the vaccine varies around the world. In the middle of November 2021, the countries with highest vaccination rates in the world were United Arab Emirates (88.20%), Portugal (87.56%), Singapore (86.25%), and Spain (80.08%). Slovakia is one of the European countries with a lower vaccination rate, as only 42.60% are fully vaccinated [4]. This low vaccination rate is the result of a weak vaccination strategy. Solidarity based vaccination strategies can only be effective if people have enough reliable information and consider all risks related to vaccination as low. Currently, Slovakia has not introduced any type of compulsory vaccination. Fortunately, with recent tightening of measures for the unvaccinated, we are seeing a slight increase in the vaccination rate [4,5].
The coronavirus pandemic has concurrently raised the issue of postponing or cancelling of elective surgeries. Ultimately, this has a significant impact on patients, causing distress to the population, and negative consequences for all healthcare systems. Furthermore, postponement of elective surgery should be a carefully considered step after weighing the dangers of transmitting the infection to the patient compared to morbidity and mortality incurred by postponing or cancelling surgery. The study of the COVIDSurg Collaborative estimated the total number of elective surgeries that would be cancelled worldwide during the 12 weeks. The best estimate was that 28,404,603 surgeries would be cancelled or postponed globally. In Slovakia, 4644 surgeries would have been cancelled per week during the COVID-19 pandemic [16,17,18].
Attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines have become a challenge for HCWs. They play an important role in influencing vaccination decisions and can be helpful in vaccine advocacy to the general public [19]. General COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCWs is common, and the prevalence among HCWs has ranged from 4.3% to 72% (average = 22.5%) [20]. At the time, vaccination coverage among our participants reached approximately 84%, of which 93.1% was among physicians, 76.9% among non-physician HCWs, and 76.5% among non-HCWs. Results of a similar published study showed high acceptance of vaccination among HCWs, but not all of them wanted to receive the vaccine. The acceptance rate of HCWs was significantly higher than of non-HCWs (76.9% vs. 56.2%) [21]. Interestingly, results of a German study showed 92% acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among HCWs [22]. Our findings were consistent with recently published studies worldwide with acceptance rates between 31% and 86% [11,23,24,25].
In general, we know that women are more represented in health services than men. In Slovakia, at the end of 2019, there were 110,778 persons working in the health services, of which 23,913 (21,6%) were men and 86,865 (78,4%) were women [26]. Non-physician HCWs, especially nurses, were the most affected occupations infected by COVID-19. In our study, non-physician HCWs were less motivated to get vaccinated against COVID-19 than physicians. These results were also confirmed by authors of other studies [23,27]. The study in Cyprus observed around 70% of respondents (nurses and midwives) were undecided to accept COVID-19 vaccine [27].
In several studies, the leading reasons for refusing vaccination were concerns about the side effects and concerns about efficacy for COVID-19 vaccine [11,27,28]. More than 68% of our participants were concerned about the adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccine, and 40.8% were concerned about its effectiveness.
Hospitals and outpatient clinics increase the risk of infection both for HCWs and patients, and also for their families. Telemedicine was not used in Slovakia before the pandemic. The patient’s examination took place either in a medical facility or at the patient’s home. Due to these facts and the fact that non-essential medical activities are often limited during a pandemic, the use of telemedicine has become an important way of managing patients’ healthcare. Telemedicine has been used abroad in the past, but during the pandemic there are more cases where specialists from various medical disciplines have started using telemedicine to care for patients. One of the several benefits of telemedicine is the reduction of the risk of COVID-19 infection through social distancing [29,30].
The priority and mission of physicians, as well as non-physician HCWs, are to promote vaccines and educate patients about the benefits of vaccination, emphasising that the benefits outweigh the risks and that each vaccine has been studied in detail to determine its safety profile.

Limitations and Strengths

The first limitation of this study is due to the non-standardised questionnaire, which could lead to problems in interpreting results. We also explain the relatively low return rate of the questionnaire by the fact that employees who refuse vaccination did not fill in the questionnaire. This study is the first study to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among HCWs in the SR. Therefore, the results can help to understand the reasons for refusing vaccination and focus on them by taking actions.

5. Conclusions

Physicians play a significant role in influencing vaccination decisions and can be helpful in vaccine advocacy to the general public. Our results confirmed that physicians have higher vaccination rates and lower hesitancy to get vaccinated than non-physician HCWs. They state the reasons for refusing vaccination against COVID-19 as concerns about efficacy and potential side effects. For this reason, it is necessary to focus on the correct interpretation of the vaccination strategy among HCWs, especially among non-physician HCWs.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph182312695/s1, Table S1: The questionnaire.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.U. and V.S.; Methodology, R.U., V.S., M.T. and J.S.; Validation, R.U.; Formal Analysis, R.U., V.S., M.T. and J.S., Investigation, R.U., V.S. and J.S.; Data curation, R.U.; Writing original draft, R.U.; Writing—Review and Editing, V.S., M.T., J.S. and H.H.; Supervision, V.S., J.S. and H.H.; Funding Acquisition, V.S., J.S. and H.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This publication was produced with the support of the Integrated Infrastructure Operational Program for the project: New possibilities for the management of serious diseases in medical and preventive care with regard to the safety of health professionals, ITMS: 313011AUA5, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund. The APC was funded by Viera Svihrova.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee at the Comenius University in Bratislava, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin (reference no. EK 138/2018).

Informed Consent Statement

Participants were informed about the research goal, that the information provided would be used for research purposes only and participation was voluntary.

Data Availability Statement

All data are fully available without any restriction upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Jana Zibolenova for her help in creating a figure in the statistical program and Silvia Pekarcikova for technical assistance in data collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

  1. World Health Organization (WHO). Director-General’s Opening Remarks at the Media Briefing on COVID-19–11 March. 2020. Available online: https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 (accessed on 18 October 2021).
  2. Ing, E.B.; Xu, Q.A.; Salimi, A.; Torun, N. Physician Deaths from Corona Virus (COVID-19) Disease. Occup. Med. 2020, 70, 370–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. World Health Organization (WHO). COVID-19 Vaccines. 2021. Available online: https://www.who.int/westernpacific/emergencies/covid-19/covid-19-vaccines (accessed on 19 October 2021).
  4. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. 2021. Available online: https://covid19.who.int/ (accessed on 16 November 2021).
  5. Ministry of Health of Slovak Republic. National Vaccination Strategy against COVID-19 in the Conditions of the Slovak Republic; Ministry of Health of Slovak Republic: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021. Available online: https://www.health.gov.sk/Zdroje?/Sources/tlacove_spravy/covid-19/Strategia-ockovania-COVID-19.pdf (accessed on 12 September 2021).
  6. Bartsch, S.M.; O’Shea, K.J.; Ferguson, M.C.; Bottazzi, M.E.; Wedlock, P.T.; Strych, U.; McKinnell, J.A.; Siegmund, S.S.; Cox, S.N.; Hotez, P.J.; et al. Vaccine efficacy needed for a COVID-19 coronavirus vaccine to prevent or stop an epidemic as the sole intervention. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2020, 59, 493–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Department of Health and Social Care of United Kingdom. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Vaccination of People Working or Deployed in Care Homes: Operational Guidance; Department of Health and Social Care: London, UK, 2021. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1010601/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-of-people-working-or-deployed-in-care-homes-operational-guidance.pdf (accessed on 7 October 2021).
  8. Decree Law 1 April 2021, No. 44. Misure Urgenti per il Contenimento Dell’Epidemia da COVID-19, in Materia di Vaccinazioni Anti SARS-CoV-2, di Giustizia e di Concorsi Pubblici. GU Serie Generale [Official Gazette of Italian Republic] n. 79 del 01-04-202.1 [Internet]. 1 April 2021. Available online: http://www.normattiva.it/eli/stato/DECRETO-LEGGE/2021/04/01/44/CONSOLIDATED (accessed on 18 October 2021).
  9. Wise, J. Covid-19: France and Greece make vaccination mandatory for healthcare workers. BMJ 2021, 374, n1797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Ministry of Health of Slovak Republic (NCZI National Health Information Centre). Number and Structure of Health Professionals Annual Report; NCZI National Health Information Centre: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021. Available online: http://www.nczisk.sk/Statisticke_vystupy/Tematicke_statisticke_vystupy/Siet_poskytovatelov_zdravotnej_starostlivosti/Pages/default.aspx (accessed on 2 October 2021).
  11. Stepanek, L.; Janosikova, M.; Nakladalova, M.; Stepanek, L.; Borikova, A.; Vildova, H. Motivation to COVID-19 Vaccination and Reasons for Hesitancy in Employees of a Czech Tertiary Care Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Vaccines 2021, 9, 863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. R Core Team. R. A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  13. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Threat Assessment Brief: Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617 Variants in India and Situation in the EU/EEA; European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC): Stockholm, Sweden, 2021. Available online: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/threat-assessment -emergence-sars-cov-2-b1617-variants (accessed on 2 October 2021).
  14. Voysey, M.; Clemens, S.A.C.; Madhi, S.A.; Weckx, L.Y.; Folegatti, P.M.; Aley, P.K.; Angus, B.; Baillie, V.L.; Barnabas, S.L.; Bhorat, Q.E.; et al. Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARSCoV-2: An interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK. Lancet 2021, 397, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lopez, B.J.; Andrews, N.; Gower, C.; Gallagher, E.; Simmons, R.; Thelwall, S.; Stowe, J.; Tessier, E.; Groves, N.; Dabrera, G.; et al. Effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant. N. Engl. J. Med. 2021, 385, 585–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. COVIDSurg Collaborative. Elective surgery cancellations due to the COVID-19 pandemic: Global predictive modelling to inform surgical recovery plans. Br. J. Surg. 2020, 107, 1440–1449. [Google Scholar]
  17. Shehata, I.M.; Elhassan, A.; Jung, J.W.; Urits, I.; Viswanath, O.; Kaye, A.D. Elective cardiac surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: Proceed or postpone? Best Pract. Res. Clin. Anaesthesiol. 2020, 343, 643–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Montemurro, N. Intracranial hemorrhage and COVID-19, but please do not forget “old diseases” and elective surgery. Brain Behav. Immun. 2021, 92, 207–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Herzog, R.; Álvarez-Pasquin, M.J.; Díaz, C.; Del Barrio, J.L.; Estrada, J.M.; Gil, A. Are healthcare workers’ intentions to vaccinate related to their knowledge, beliefs and attitudes? A systematic review. BMC Public Health 2013, 13, 154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  20. Biswas, N.; Mustapha, T.; Khubchandani, J.; Price, J.H. The Nature and Extent of COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy in Healthcare Workers. J. Community Health 2021, 46, 1244–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Wang, M.W.; Wen, W.; Wang, N.; Zhou, M.Y.; Wang, C.Y.; Ni, J.; Jiang, J.J.; Zhang, X.W.; Feng, Z.H.; Cheng, Y.R. COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance Among Healthcare Workers and Non-healthcare Workers in China: A Survey. Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 709056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Holzmann-Littig, C.; Braunisch, M.C.; Kranke, P.; Popp, M.; Seeber, C.; Fichtner, F.; Littig, B.; Carbajo-Lozoya, J.; Allwang, C.; Frank, T.; et al. COVID-19 Vaccination Acceptance and Hesitancy among Healthcare Workers in Germany. Vaccines 2021, 9, 777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Wang, K.; Wong, E.L.Y.; Ho, K.F.; Cheung, A.W.L.; Chan, E.Y.Y.; Yeoh, E.K.; Wong, S.Y.S. Intention of nurses to accept coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination and change of intention to accept seasonal influenza vaccination during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey. Vaccine 2020, 38, 7049–7056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kwok, K.O.; Li, K.-K.; Wei, W.I.; Tang, A.; Wong, S.Y.S.; Lee, S.S. Influenza vaccine uptake, COVID-19 vaccination intention and vaccine hesitancy among nurses: A survey. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2021, 114, 103854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Dror, A.A.; Eisenbach, N.; Taiber, S.; Morozov, N.G.; Mizrachi, M.; Zigron, A.; Srouji, S.; Sela, E. Vaccine hesitancy: The next challenge in the fight against COVID-19. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2020, 35, 775–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Ministry of Health of Slovak Republic (NCZI National Health Information Centre). Healthcare Workers of the Slovak Republic in 2019; NCZI National Health Information Centre: Bratislava, Slovakia, 2021. Available online: https://www.nczisk.sk/aktuality/Pages/Pracovnici-v-zdravotnictve-Slovenskej-republiky-v-roku-2019.aspx (accessed on 20 November 2021).
  27. Fakonti, G.; Kyprianidou, M.; Toumbis, G.; Giannakou, K. Attitudes and Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination Among Nurses and Midwives in Cyprus: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 656138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Di Gennaro, F.; Murri, R.; Segala, F.V.; Cerruti, L.; Abdulle, A.; Saracino, A.; Bavaro, D.F.; Fantoni, M. Attitudes towards Anti-SARS-CoV2 Vaccination among Healthcare Workers: Results from a National Survey in Italy. Viruses 2021, 13, 371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Colbert, G.B.; Venegas-Vera, A.V.; Lerma, E.V. Utility of telemedicine in the COVID-19 era. Rev. Cardiovasc. Med. 2020, 21, 583–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Montemurro, N.; Perrini, P. Will COVID-19 change neurosurgical clinical practice? Br. J. Neurosurg. 2020, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ijerph 18 12695 g001 550
Figure 1. Process of data collection.
Figure 1. Process of data collection.
Ijerph 18 12695 g001
Ijerph 18 12695 g002 550
Figure 2. Predictors of COVID-19 vaccination (multivariate logistic regression analysis). Note: HCWs, healthcare workers; OR, Odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Figure 2. Predictors of COVID-19 vaccination (multivariate logistic regression analysis). Note: HCWs, healthcare workers; OR, Odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Ijerph 18 12695 g002
Table
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of participants.
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of participants.
Total
(n = 1277)		Vaccinated
(n = 1076)		Unvaccinated
(n = 201)		p Value
Age (years; average ± SD)48.3 ± 12.648.7 ± 12.646.3 ± 12.20.014 *
Job duration (years; average ± SD)21.1 ± 15.121.9 ± 15.017.1 ± 14.8<0.001 *
Level of fear of COVID-19 (average ± SD)5.7 ± 2.76.1 ± 2.73.7 ± 2.4<0.001 *
Male N (%)
Female N (%)		280
997		249 (88.9)
827 (82.9)		31 (11.1)
170 (17.1)		0.016 **
0.016 **
Physicians N (%)
Non-physician HCWs N (%)
Non-HCWs N (%)		582
542
153		542 (93.1)
417 (76.9)
117 (76.5)		40 (6.9)
125 (23.1)
36 (23.5)		<0.001 **
<0.001 **
0.005 **
Hospitals N (%)
Outpatient healthcare clinic N (%)		745
532		592 (79.5)
484 (91.0)		153 (20.5)
48 (9.0)		<0.001 **
<0.001 **
History of COVID-19 N (%)354250 (70.6)104 (29.4)<0.001 **
Influenza vaccinated at any time in the past N (%)
Influenza vaccinated last season N (%)		477
283		449 (94.1)
274 (96.8)		28 (5.9)
9 (3.2)		<0.001 **
<0.001 **
Note: HCWs, healthcare workers; * p < 0.05 (Student’s t-test); ** p < 0.05 (chi-square test).
Table
Table 2. Motives to get vaccinated against COVID-19 (vaccinated group, N = 1076) according to selected variables (occupation and history of COVID-19).
Table 2. Motives to get vaccinated against COVID-19 (vaccinated group, N = 1076) according to selected variables (occupation and history of COVID-19).
MotivesPhysicians
N = 542		Physicians
N = 542		Non-Physician HCWs
N = 417		Hospitals
N = 592		History of COVID-19
N =250
Non-Physician HCWs
N = 417		Non-HCWs
N = 117		Non-HCWs
N = 117		Outpatient HC
N =484		No history of COVID-19
N = 826
Concerns about COVID-19 itself380 (70.1%) *380 (70.1%) *233 (55.9%)346 (58.5%) *137 (54.8%) *
233 (55.9%)70 (59.8%)70 (59.8%)337 (69.6%)546 (66.1%)
An effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 during the performance of my profession474 (87.5%)474 (87.5%) *347 (83.2%)492 (83.1%)206 (82.4%)
347 (83.2%)91 (77.8%)91 (77.8%)420 (86.8%)706 (85.5%)
An effort to protect family members393 (72.5%)393 (72.5%)287 (68.8%)404 (68.2%) *167 (66.8%)
287 (68.8%)81 (69.2%)81 (69.2%)357 (73.8%)594 (71.9%)
Being exempted from restrictive anti-pandemic measures after vaccination160 (29.5%)160 (29.5%)126 (30.2%)174 (29.4%)82 (32.8%)
126 (30.2%)29 (24.8%)29 (24.8%)141 (29.1%)233 (28.2%)
Others37 (6.8%)37 (6.8%)34 (8.1%)40 (6.8%)18 (7.2%)
34 (8.1%)7 (5.9%)7 (5.9%)38 (7.9%)60 (7.3%)
Note: HCWs, healthcare workers; Outpatient HC, outpatient healthcare clinics; * p < 0.05 (Student’s t-test); multiple-choice options.
Table
Table 3. Reasons for personal COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (unvaccinated group, N = 201) according to selected variables (occupation and history of COVID-19).
Table 3. Reasons for personal COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (unvaccinated group, N = 201) according to selected variables (occupation and history of COVID-19).
ReasonsPhysicians
N = 40		Physicians
N = 40		Non-Physician HCWs
N =125		Hospitals
N = 153		History of COVID-19
N = 104
Non-Physician HCWs
N = 125		Non-HCWs
N = 36		Non-HCWs
N = 36		Outpatient HC
N = 48		No History of COVID-19
N = 97
I am not afraid of COVID-19, its course and consequences5 (12.5%)5 (12.5%)15 (12.0%)15 (9.8%)10 (9.6%)
15 (12.0%)3 (8.3%)3 (8.3%)5 (10.4%)13 (13.4%)
I do not find getting infected with COVID-19 likely0 (0.0%)0 (0.0%)9 (7.2%)8 (5.2%)2 (1.9%)
9 (7.2%)0 (0.0%)0 (0.0%)1 (2.1%)7 (7.2%)
I do not trust the efficacy of vaccines against COVID-1911 (27.5%) *11 (27.5%)58 (46.4%)68 (44.4%) *34 (32.7%) *
58 (46.4%)13 (36.1%)13 (36.1%)7 (15.6%)48 (49.5%)
I have concerns about the safety and side effects of vaccines against COVID-1928 (70.0%)28 (70.0%)86 (68.8%)112 (73.2%) *66 (63.5%)
86 (68.8%)28 (77.8%)28 (77.8%)25 (52.1%)71 (73.2%)
I went through COVID-19 and assume lasting immunity against disease12 (30.0%)12 (30.0%)43 (34.4%)55 (35.9%)68 (65.4%) *
43 (34.4%)14 (38.9%) 14 (38.9%)14 (29.2%)1 (1.0%)
I have contraindications of expect a complicated vaccination course in my case10 (25.0%)10 (25.0%)30 (24.0%)33 (21.6%)22 (21.2%)
30 (24.0%)8 (22.2%)8 (22.2%)15 (31.3%)26 (26.8%)
Others15 (37.5%) *15 (37.5%) *19 (15.2%)24 (15.7%) *20 (19.2%)
19 (15.2%)6 (16.7%)6 (16.7%)16 (33.3%)20 (20.7%)
Note: HCWs, healthcare workers; Outpatient HC, outpatient healthcare clinics; * p < 0.05 (Student’s t-test); multiple-choice options.
Table
Table 4. Attitudes towards introduction of compulsory vaccination (N = 1277).
Table 4. Attitudes towards introduction of compulsory vaccination (N = 1277).
COVID-19 VaccinationOccupation
Compulsory VaccinationVaccinated
N = 1076		Unvaccinated
N = 201		p ValuePhysicians
N = 582		Non-Physician HCWs
N = 542		p Value
Only HCWs658 (61.2%)5 (2.5%)<0.001 *378 (64.9%)213 (39.3%)<0.001 *
Selected population644 (59.9%)4 (1.9%)<0.001 *377 (64.7%)204 (37.6%)<0.001 *
Whole population432 (40.2%)1 (0.5%)<0.001 *241 (41.4%)148 (27.3%)<0.001 *
Note: HCWs, healthcare workers; * p < 0.05 (chi-square test).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ulbrichtova, R.; Svihrova, V.; Tatarkova, M.; Hudeckova, H.; Svihra, J. Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination among Healthcare and Non-Healthcare Workers of Hospitals and Outpatient Clinics in the Northern Region of Slovakia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12695. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312695

AMA Style

Ulbrichtova R, Svihrova V, Tatarkova M, Hudeckova H, Svihra J. Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination among Healthcare and Non-Healthcare Workers of Hospitals and Outpatient Clinics in the Northern Region of Slovakia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(23):12695. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312695

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ulbrichtova, Romana, Viera Svihrova, Maria Tatarkova, Henrieta Hudeckova, and Jan Svihra. 2021. "Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination among Healthcare and Non-Healthcare Workers of Hospitals and Outpatient Clinics in the Northern Region of Slovakia" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 23: 12695. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182312695

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop