Dataset Information

Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccine Attitudes among Arab American Healthcare Professionals Living in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Vaccine hesitancy is the next great barrier for public health. Arab Americans are a rapidly growing demographic in the United States with limited information on the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy. We therefore sought to study the attitudes towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine amongst Arab American health professionals living in the United States.

Methods

This was a cross sectional study utilizing an anonymous online survey. The survey was distributed via e-mail to National Arab American Medical Association members and Arab-American Center for Economic and Social Services healthcare employees. Respondents were considered vaccine hesitant if they selected responses other than a willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

Results

A total of 4000 surveys were sent via e-mail from 28 December 2020 to 31 January 2021, and 513 responses were received. The highest group of respondents were between the ages of 18-29 years and physicians constituted 48% of the respondents. On multivariable analysis, we found that respondents who had declined an influenza vaccine in the preceding 5 years (p < 0.001) and allied health professionals (medical assistants, hospital administrators, case managers, researchers, scribes, pharmacists, dieticians and social workers) were more likely to be vaccine hesitant (p = 0.025). In addition, respondents earning over $150,000 US dollars annually were less likely to be vaccine hesitant and this finding was significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011).

Conclusions

Vaccine hesitancy among health care providers could have substantial impact on vaccine attitudes of the general population, and such data may help inform vaccine advocacy efforts.

SUBMITTER: Shallal A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8471462 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAnticipating an initial shortage of vaccines for COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States developed priority vaccine allocations for specific demographic groups in the population. This study evaluates the performance of the CDC vaccine allocation strategy with respect to multiple potentially competing vaccination goals (minimizing mortality, cases, infections, and years of life lost (YLL)), under the same framework as the CDC allocation: four priority vaccination groups and population demographics stratified by age, comorbidities, occupation and living condition (congested or non-congested).Methods and findingsWe developed a compartmental disease model that incorporates key elements of the current pandemic including age-varying susceptibility to infection, age-varying clinical fraction, an active case-count dependent social distancing level, and time-varying infectivity (accounting for the emergence of more infectious virus strains). The CDC allocation strategy is compared to all other possibly optimal allocations that stagger vaccine roll-out in up to four phases (17.5 million strategies). The CDC allocation strategy performed well in all vaccination goals but never optimally. Under the developed model, the CDC allocation deviated from the optimal allocations by small amounts, with 0.19% more deaths, 4.0% more cases, 4.07% more infections, and 0.97% higher YLL, than the respective optimal strategies. The CDC decision to not prioritize the vaccination of individuals under the age of 16 was optimal, as was the prioritization of health-care workers and other essential workers over non-essential workers. Finally, a higher prioritization of individuals with comorbidities in all age groups improved outcomes compared to the CDC allocation.ConclusionThe developed approach can be used to inform the design of future vaccine allocation strategies in the United States, or adapted for use by other countries seeking to optimize the effectiveness of their vaccine allocation strategies.

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization recommends continued breastfeeding up to 2 years of age or beyond. This study assessed breastfeeding knowledge, attitudes, and practices among women residing on the island of Abu Dhabi and identified associated factors.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire among mothers visiting primary healthcare clinics in Abu Dhabi between November 2014 and 2015. Participants were women aged at least 18 years who had at least one child aged 2 years or younger at the time of the study. Breastfeeding knowledge, attitudes, and practices were assessed on the basis of experience with last child. Selected questions were used to develop a scaled scoring system to categorize these aspects as good, fair, or poor. Exclusive breastfeeding is defined as the act of feeding infants only breast milk since birth, without providing water, formula, or other liquid supplements.ResultsThe participants were 344 women. Exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months was reported by only 46 (16.9%, 95% CI 0.10, 0.17, n?=?272). 79 (28.7%, n?=?275) of the participants were breastfeeding and planning to continue after the child was ?24 months. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the following factors were associated with exclusive breastfeeding: mothers with female children (adjusted OR [AOR] 2.42; 95% CI 1.18, 4.97) and better breastfeeding knowledge scores (AOR 1.25; 95% CI 1.04, 1.50). The following factors were associated with less likelihood of exclusively breastfeeding: working mothers (AOR 0.29; 95% CI 0.12, 0.72), living with relatives (AOR 0.21; 95% CI 0.05, 0.81), no past exclusive breastfeeding experience (AOR 0.23; 95% CI 0.09, 0.58) and being offered readymade liquid formula in hospital (AOR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15, 0.72). The most common reason for stopping breastfeeding was insufficient breast milk production (68/89, 76%), and the most common work related reason was inadequate maternity leave (24/89, 15%).ConclusionAlthough breastfeeding knowledge was generally good, breastfeeding practice was still suboptimal. Modifiable factors found to predict exclusive breastfeeding included breastfeeding knowledge and mothers' employment status.

Project description:In order to successfully translate the scientific models of genetic testing and pharmacogenomics into clinical practice, empowering healthcare workers with the right knowledge and functional understanding on the subject is essential. Limited research in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have assessed healthcare worker stances towards genomics. This study aimed to assess healthcare workers' knowledge and attitudes on genetic testing. A cross-sectional study was conducted among healthcare workers practicing in either public or private hospitals or clinics as pharmacists, nurses, physicians, managers, and allied health. Participants were recruited randomly and via snowball techniques. Surveys were collected between April and September 2019; out of 552 respondents, 63.4% were female, the mean age was 38 (±9.6) years old. The mean knowledge score was 5.2 (±2.3) out of nine, which shows a fair level of knowledge. The scores of respondents of pharmacy were 5.1 (±2.5), medicine 6.0 (±2.0), and nursing 4.8 (±2.1). All participants exhibited a fair knowledge level about genetic testing and pharmacogenomics. Of the respondents, 91.9% showed a positive attitude regarding availability of genetic testing. The top identified barrier to implementation was the cost of testing (62%), followed by lack of training or education and insurance coverage (57.8% and 57.2%, respectively). Building upon the positive attitudes and tackling the barriers and challenges will pave the road for full implementation of genetic testing and pharmacogenomics in the UAE. We recommend empowering healthcare workers by improving needed and tailored competencies related to their area of practice. We strongly urge the stakeholders to streamline and benchmark the workflow, algorithm, and guidelines to standardize the health and electronic system. Lastly, we advocate utilizing technology and electronic decision support as well as the translational report to back up healthcare workers in the UAE.

Project description:BackgroundIn addition to administering vaccinations, healthcare professionals (HCPs) also play a crucial role in providing education and advocacy to the public regarding immunizations. Yet, many current and future HCPs are unprepared or reluctant to address the vaccine conversation with hesitant patients. Doctors, pharmacists, and nurses are all recognized as the most trusted sources of vaccine information. By comparing future HCPs in these three distinct programs, we can better understand where potential gaps may lie in their training and education. With insight from students, potential changes to curriculum can improve future HCPs ability to address vaccine hesitancy in their respective careers. The objective of this study was to assess and compare the knowledge, attitudes, and opinions of HCP students on the topic of immunization.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017 to assess students in nursing, medical, and pharmacy programs at two universities in the state of North Dakota in the United States. The survey assessed six key themes: 1) demographic information; 2) basic vaccine knowledge; 3) vaccine hesitancy; 4) likelihood to recommend vaccines; 5) confidence in addressing vaccine-related topics with patients; 6) an appraisal of the education they have received on vaccinations.ResultsThe survey was completed by 223 participants (overall response rate = 23.7%). Results indicated that vaccine-related knowledge varied greatly by program; high knowledge scores were achieved by 74.3% of medical students, 62.7% of pharmacy students, 57.1% of doctor of nursing practice (DNP) students, and 24.7% of bachelor of science in nursing (BSN) students. Over a third (34.2%) of BSN students believed that the current recommended immunization schedule places undue burden on a child's immune system, versus only 4.3% of medical students. Additionally, 54.2% of participants believed that spreading out recommended vaccines over several visits was an appropriate means of reducing parental stress about vaccinating.ConclusionsParticipant responses suggest that negative attitudes, lack of knowledge, and general discomfort exist across all programs, but especially among nursing students, regarding vaccination. Our findings indicate potential areas where targeted interventions could be implemented to better equip future HCPs in their ability to discuss and educate the public regarding vaccination.Trial registration#PH17173.