tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
GMS Infect Dis. 2018 Feb 23;6
oc02. doi: 10.3205/id000037. eCollection 2018.
[h=1]Influenza vaccination coverage of health care workers: a cross-sectional study based on data from a Swiss gynaecological hospital.[/h] Dass von Perbandt E[SUP]1[/SUP], Hornung R[SUP]1[/SUP], Thanner M[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Background: Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe influenza and related complications. The vaccination has been recommended in healthcare workers as a strategy for preventing influenza in risk patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the influenza vaccination rate of the department of obstetrics and gynaecology of the Cantonal hospital St. Gallen in Switzerland. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out to investigate the influenza vaccination rates of all staff members of the Department of obstetrics and gynaecology (n=259). The vaccination coverage was compared according to sociodemographic variables using Chi-squared test. Associations were determined using a logistic regression model. Possible reasons for and against vaccination coverage were then investigated. Results: 200 questionnaires were included (valid response rate 77%). 15% reported being vaccinated against influenza (n=29). Reasons to be vaccinated are the belief of protection of patients (82%), oneself (75%) or family (61%). Reasons not to get vaccinated, including beliefs regarding the vaccine is not important (49%) and its ineffectiveness (44%). In the logistic regression analysis, the vaccination coverage among doctors (61% vaccinated) and nurses/midwives (4% vaccinated) is different from the vaccination coverage among the non-medical staff reference category (16% vaccinated; p=0.004, p=0.027), after controlling for the effect of other variables sex (p=0.807), age (p=0.438) and full time employment (p=0.298). Discussion: This study showed that doctors have a higher vaccination rate compared to other job roles, whereas the nurses and midwives had very low vaccination rates, which indicate a significant public health communication gap that needs to be addressed.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] infectious disease; pregnancy/gravidity; public health
PMID: 30671333 PMCID: PMC6301741 DOI: 10.3205/id000037
[TABLE="cellspacing: 1"]
[TR]
[TD="class: SL, width: 10%, align: right"][/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 20%, align: left"]Detect languageundefined[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 3, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 20%, align: left"]undefined[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 15%, align: right"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Text-to-speech function is limited to 200 characters
oc02. doi: 10.3205/id000037. eCollection 2018.[h=1]Influenza vaccination coverage of health care workers: a cross-sectional study based on data from a Swiss gynaecological hospital.[/h] Dass von Perbandt E[SUP]1[/SUP], Hornung R[SUP]1[/SUP], Thanner M[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]
[h=3]Abstract[/h] Background: Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe influenza and related complications. The vaccination has been recommended in healthcare workers as a strategy for preventing influenza in risk patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the influenza vaccination rate of the department of obstetrics and gynaecology of the Cantonal hospital St. Gallen in Switzerland. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out to investigate the influenza vaccination rates of all staff members of the Department of obstetrics and gynaecology (n=259). The vaccination coverage was compared according to sociodemographic variables using Chi-squared test. Associations were determined using a logistic regression model. Possible reasons for and against vaccination coverage were then investigated. Results: 200 questionnaires were included (valid response rate 77%). 15% reported being vaccinated against influenza (n=29). Reasons to be vaccinated are the belief of protection of patients (82%), oneself (75%) or family (61%). Reasons not to get vaccinated, including beliefs regarding the vaccine is not important (49%) and its ineffectiveness (44%). In the logistic regression analysis, the vaccination coverage among doctors (61% vaccinated) and nurses/midwives (4% vaccinated) is different from the vaccination coverage among the non-medical staff reference category (16% vaccinated; p=0.004, p=0.027), after controlling for the effect of other variables sex (p=0.807), age (p=0.438) and full time employment (p=0.298). Discussion: This study showed that doctors have a higher vaccination rate compared to other job roles, whereas the nurses and midwives had very low vaccination rates, which indicate a significant public health communication gap that needs to be addressed.
[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] infectious disease; pregnancy/gravidity; public health
PMID: 30671333 PMCID: PMC6301741 DOI: 10.3205/id000037
[TABLE="cellspacing: 1"]
[TR]
[TD="class: SL, width: 10%, align: right"][/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 20%, align: left"]Detect languageundefined[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 3, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 20%, align: left"]undefined[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 8%, align: center"]
[/TD]
[TD="class: SL, width: 15%, align: right"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Text-to-speech function is limited to 200 characters