4.5 Review

Healthcare Workers' (HCWs) attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

VACCINE
Volume 39, Issue 6, Pages 901-914

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.12.061

Keywords

Influenza; Human; Vaccination; Immunization programs; Health personnel

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that in some settings, the majority of HCWs support mandatory vaccination, but acceptance varies. Vaccinated HCWs more frequently agree with the mandatory vaccination policy. More studies focusing on this as the main outcome are needed to further understand associated characteristics.
Influenza is a disease responsible for thousands of deaths every year. Although healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a way of contagion for patients, vaccination coverage among them is low. Mandatory vaccination has been proposed, but controversies remain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the acceptance of mandatory vaccination by HCWs, and to investigate associated characteristics. MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Psyclnfo, CINAHL and Web of Science were used to search for studies assessing the topic. PRISMA statements were followed. Of the 13,457 univocal records found, 52 studies were included in the systematic review and 40 in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of HCWs accepting the policy was of 61% (95% CI: 53%- 68%) but with great heterogeneity between continents (from 54% in Europe to 69% in Asia) and in different professionals (from 40% in nurses to 80% in students). Vaccinated HCWs agreed more frequently with mandatory vaccination than non-vaccinated ones. More studies that consider mandatory vaccination acceptance as the main outcome are needed, but the results of this study confirm that in some settings the majority of HCWs favour mandatory vaccination. This, combined with effects that a flu epidemic could have if overlapped to pandemics with similar symptoms, requires renewed considerations on mandatory vaccination. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available