IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12695-d693243.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Romana Ulbrichtova

    (Department of Public Health, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Mala Hora 11149/4B, 036 01 Martin, Slovakia)

  • Viera Svihrova

    (Department of Public Health, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Mala Hora 11149/4B, 036 01 Martin, Slovakia)

  • Maria Tatarkova

    (Department of Public Health, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Mala Hora 11149/4B, 036 01 Martin, Slovakia)

  • Henrieta Hudeckova

    (Department of Public Health, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Mala Hora 11149/4B, 036 01 Martin, Slovakia)

  • Jan Svihra

    (Clinic of Urology, Jessenius Faculty of Medicine in Martin, Comenius University in Bratislava, Kollarova 2, 036 59 Martin, Slovakia)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Romana Ulbrichtova & Viera Svihrova & Maria Tatarkova & Henrieta Hudeckova & 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," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12695-:d:693243
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12695/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12695/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Battsetseg Turbat & Bold Sharavyn & Feng-Jen Tsai, 2021. "Attitudes towards Mandatory Occupational Vaccination and Intention to Get COVID-19 Vaccine during the First Pandemic Wave among Mongolian Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Martina Baránková & Katarína Greškovičová & Bronislava Strnádelová & Katarina Krizova & Júlia Halamová, 2022. "Let Us Take It into Our Own Hands: Patient Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Ngqabutho Moyo & Anita D. Bhappu & Moment Bhebhe & Farai Ncube, 2022. "Perceived Risk of COVID-19 and Employee Decision-Making: How Psychological Distress during the Pandemic Increases Negative Performance Outcomes among Healthcare Workers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-16, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12695-:d:693243. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.