Dataset Information

Kidney transplant recipients' attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination and barriers and enablers to vaccine acceptance.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To identify barriers and enablers to COVID-19 vaccination in renal transplant recipients who are undecided about vaccination.

Methods

An online survey was distributed to 876 adult kidney transplant recipients at a tertiary referral service, who had not been vaccinated against COVID-19. The survey assessed willingness to be vaccinated, attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines, and barriers and enablers to proceeding with vaccination.

Results

The survey response rate was 54% (473/876). Three hundred and forty-six (73.1%) participants planned to receive vaccination (yes group), 105 (22.2%) were undecided, and 22 (4.7%) refused vaccination. The undecided group were younger but were not different in other demographic characteristics to the yes group. The undecided group were less positive toward (34.29% vs. 91.3%, p < .001) and more concerned about (93.3% vs. 25.1%, p < .001) vaccination than the yes group. Their concerns related to vaccine safety (including harm to their transplant), poor efficacy, and a lack of rigorous testing in transplant recipients. Undecided recipients had received less vaccine-specific information from medical specialists than the yes group. Most undecided participants (95.1%) were willing to proceed with vaccination with appropriate supports. The most desired supports were information and a recommendation to proceed with vaccination from their treating transplant specialist and team.

Conclusion(s)

Concerns about vaccine safety (including harm to transplant), poor vaccine efficacy, and lack of rigorous testing were barriers to vaccine uptake. Most undecided recipients would proceed with vaccination with specific recommendations and vaccine information provided by their transplant specialist/team. These simple interventions can be readily implemented to optimize vaccine uptake.

SUBMITTER: Tharmaraj D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8646313 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Socioeconomically deprived individuals with renal disease are less likely to receive a live-donor kidney transplant than less-deprived individuals. This qualitative study aimed to identify reasons for the observed socioeconomic disparity in live-donor kidney transplantation.A qualitative study using face-to-face in-depth semistructured interviews.A UK tertiary renal referral hospital and transplant centre.Purposive sampling was used to select deceased-donor transplant recipients from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (SED) (19 participants), followed by a low SED comparison group (13 participants), aiming for maximum diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, primary renal disease and previous renal replacement therapy.Participants were interviewed following their routine transplant clinic review. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using NVivo software and analysed using the constant comparison method described in Grounded Theory.Themes common and distinct to each socioeconomic group emerged. 6 themes appeared to distinguish between individuals from areas of high and low SED. 4 themes were distinct to participants from areas of high SED: (1) Passivity, (2) Disempowerment, (3) Lack of social support and (4) Short-term focus. 2 themes were distinct to the low SED group: (1) Financial concerns and (2) Location of donor.Several of the emerging themes from the high SED individuals relate to an individual's lack of confidence and skill in managing their health and healthcare; themes that are in keeping with low levels of patient activation. Inadequate empowerment of socioeconomically deprived individuals by healthcare practitioners was also described. Financial concerns did not emerge as a barrier from interviews with the high SED group. Interventions aiming to redress the observed socioeconomic inequity should be targeted at both patients and clinical teams to increase empowerment and ensure shared decision-making.