4.4 Article

Vaccination coverage among health-care workers: pre-post intervention study to assess impact of an on-site vaccination-dedicated clinic

期刊

EXPERT REVIEW OF VACCINES
卷 20, 期 6, 页码 753-759

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2021.1915776

关键词

Health-care workers; on-site vaccination-dedicated clinic; occupational risk; recommended vaccinations; vaccination coverage

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed a significant increase in vaccination coverage among HCWs by establishing a dedicated vaccination clinic on-site, indicating the significant role of enabling factors in decision-making and implementation of health-related behaviors.
Background Several studies have revealed low vaccinations coverage among health-care workers (HCWs) for all vaccinations. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of the implementation of an on-site vaccination-dedicated clinic on the vaccination coverage rates of HCWs. Research design and methods A quasi-experimental pre-post intervention study was carried out among undergraduate and postgraduate students attending medical and health-care professions schools. Results We enrolled 804 students, 404 in the control and 400 in the experimental group. A significantly higher increase of vaccination coverage in the experimental group than in the control group for all the investigated vaccinations (p < 0.001) was found. The odds of adherence to vaccinations in the experimental group, compared to the control group, ranged from 6.9-fold (95% CI 3.51-13.44) to 18.9-fold (95% CI 10.85-32.96). The increase in the coverage rate in the control group was between 2.5% and 3.5%, whereas in the experimental group, higher increases were found, ranging from 34.8% to 71%. Conclusions The extraordinary increase in the adherence to HCWs recommended vaccinations found in the study seems to indicate a significant role of enabling factors in the complex process of decision-making and implementation of health-related behaviors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据