What determines health professionals' COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy? A nationwide study

Marta Estrela; Tânia Magalhães Silva; Vítor Roque; Eva Rebelo Gomes; Fátima Roque; Maria Teresa Herdeiro; Adolfo Figueiras

doi:10.1111/eci.13785

What determines health professionals' COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy? A nationwide study

Eur J Clin Invest. 2022 Jul;52(7):e13785. doi: 10.1111/eci.13785. Epub 2022 Apr 8.

Authors

Marta Estrela¹, Tânia Magalhães Silva¹, Vítor Roque², Eva Rebelo Gomes³, Fátima Roque^{2

4}, Maria Teresa Herdeiro¹, Adolfo Figueiras^{5

6}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Medical Sciences, iBiMED-Institute of Biomedicine, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal.
² Research Unit for Inland Development, Guarda Polytechnic Institute (UDI-IPG), Guarda, Portugal.
³ Allergy and Clinical Immunology Service, University Hospital Center of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
⁴ Health Sciences Research Center, University of Beira Interior (CICS-UBI), Covilhã, Portugal.
⁵ Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
⁶ Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBER Epidemiology and Public Health - CIBERESP), Santiago de Compostela, Spain.

Abstract

Introduction: To contain the COVID-19 pandemic, higher vaccination rates are essential. However, as vaccine hesitancy is a reality, it is important to understand what drives health professionals to refuse getting vaccinated against COVID-19, who have been in the frontline of this pandemic since its beginning and may be key actors to improve vaccine coverage among their patients.

Purpose: This study aims to assess the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy (VH) among health professionals (physicians, nurses, pharmacists and dentists).

Methods: A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted through an online survey, with 890 Portuguese health professionals. A logistic regression analysis was used to determine the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of the independent variables (perceptions, knowledge and attitudes) per 1-point increase in the Likert scale and VH.

Results: Complacency, communications, confidence and convenience were strongly associated with VH probability. Concerns about vaccines' efficacy (OR_Physicians = 8.33, 95% CI: 4.51-15.36) and safety (OR_Nurses = 11.07, 95% CI: 4.12-29.77) increase the risk of VH on all health professional groups. A reduction of VH probability is associated with higher risk perceptions of getting infected (1/OR_Nurses = 2.76, 95% CI: 1.52-5.02) and suffering complications (1/OR_Nurses = 33.72, 95% CI: 8.48-134.13), higher confidence in the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines (1/OR_Dentists = 12.29, 95% CI: 2.91-51.89), risk perception of getting infected if vaccinated (1/OR_Physicians = 14.92, 95% CI: 6.85-32.50), risk of suffering from complications after getting vaccinated, and higher trust levels on the information transmitted by competent authorities (1/OR_Dentists = 17.76, 95% CI: 3.83-82.22).

Conclusions: To reduce COVID-19 VH, which appears to be highly influenced by perceptions, knowledge and attitudes, it is essential to promote interventions directed to transforming these potentially modifiable determinants.

Keywords: COVID-19; Portugal; cross-sectional; health professionals; hesitancy; vaccination.

MeSH terms

COVID-19 Vaccines / therapeutic use
COVID-19* / epidemiology
COVID-19* / prevention & control
Cross-Sectional Studies
Humans
Pandemics
Vaccination Hesitancy
Vaccination Refusal*

Substances

COVID-19 Vaccines

Grants and funding

LL-20-04-01/LaCaixa Foundation