South African University Staff and Students' Perspectives, Preferences, and Drivers of Hesitancy Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines: A Multi-Methods Study.
South African University Staff and Students' Perspectives, Preferences, and Drivers of Hesitancy Regarding COVID-19 Vaccines: A Multi-Methods Study.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/vaccines10081250
复制
发表时间：
2022-08-04
期刊：
影响因子：
7.8
通讯作者：
Moshabela, Mosa
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
George, Gavin;Strauss, Michael;Lansdell, Emma;Nadesan-Reddy, Nisha;Moroe, Nomfundo;Reddy, Tarylee;Eshun-Wilsonova, Ingrid;Moshabela, Mosa
COVID-19疫苗犹豫对目前正在实施的疫苗接种计划的成功构成威胁。对疫苗有效性和疫苗相关不良事件的担忧是疫苗接种的潜在障碍;然而，目前尚不清楚有针对性的宣传和疫苗接种计划是否会影响接种。了解包括学生在内的关键群体的偏好，可以指导针对青年的COVID-19疫苗接种计划的实施，确保最佳的接种率。这项研究调查了大学教职员工和学生对COVID-19疫苗的看法、偏好和犹豫的驱动因素。一个多方法的方法使用在线方便抽样调查和离散选择实验（DCE），针对工作人员和学生在南非的夸祖鲁-纳塔尔大学。调查及学生发展测试可供教职员及学生使用，数据收集于2021年11月18日至12月24日期间进行。该调查采用了从以前使用的工具改编的修改后的李克特评级问题，捕捉了人口特征以及对COVID-19和可用疫苗的态度和观点。DCE被嵌入到调查工具中，并改变了COVID-19疫苗计划的关键特征，以计算相对效用（偏好）并确定权衡。共有1836名工作人员和学生参加了这项研究（541名工作人员，1262名学生，33名未公开）。共有1145名（62%）受访者表示已接种COVID-19疫苗。与教职员工相比，学生接种COVID-19疫苗的比例较低（教职员工为79%，学生为57%）。疫苗的有效性（22%）和安全性（21%）是不接种疫苗的两个主要原因。这些担忧在DCE中也很明显，教职员工和学生受到疫苗有效性的显著影响，与70%或50%有效的疫苗相比，参与者更喜欢高效疫苗（90%有效）（β =-3.72，95%CI =-4.39至-3.04）;这一特征对任何属性的偏好都有最强的影响。研究还发现，接种疫苗的频率对偏好有显著影响，参与者从需要两次初始疫苗剂量的选择替代方案中获得的效用较低，而不是一次剂量（β = −1.00，95% CI = −1.42至−0.58）或每年一次的加强剂（β = −2.35，95% CI = −2.85至−1.86）。值得注意的是，与无激励相比，350南非兰特（23.28美元）的激励确实具有正效用（β = 1.14，95%CI = 0.76至1.53）。鉴于南非年轻人接种疫苗的速度缓慢，这项研究为推动这一人群犹豫不决的因素提供了有价值的见解。人们对疫苗的安全性和有效性表示关切，尽管人们仍然倾向于提供高效的服务。受访者对不得不服用助推剂的前景并不热情，这一点在推出数据中得到了体现。财政激励措施可能会增加初次接种疫苗的人数，并对随后的加强剂产生更有利的反应。大学应考虑就疫苗有效性提供量身定制的信息，并促进疫苗的获取，使服务与教职员工和学生的既定偏好保持一致。
COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy poses a threat to the success of vaccination programmes currently being implemented. Concerns regarding vaccine effectiveness and vaccine-related adverse events are potential barriers to vaccination; however, it remains unclear whether tailored messaging and vaccination programmes can influence uptake. Understanding the preferences of key groups, including students, could guide the implementation of youth-targeted COVID-19 vaccination programmes, ensuring optimal uptake. This study examined university staff and students’ perspectives, preferences, and drivers of hesitancy regarding COVID-19 vaccines. A multi-methods approach was used—an online convenience sample survey and discrete choice experiment (DCE)—targeting staff and students at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The survey and DCE were available for staff and students, and data were collected from 18 November to 24 December 2021. The survey captured demographic characteristics as well as attitudes and perspectives of COVID-19 and available vaccines using modified Likert rating questions adapted from previously used tools. The DCE was embedded within the survey tool and varied critical COVID-19 vaccine programme characteristics to calculate relative utilities (preferences) and determine trade-offs. A total of 1836 staff and students participated in the study (541 staff, 1262 students, 33 undisclosed). A total of 1145 (62%) respondents reported that they had been vaccinated against COVID-19. Vaccination against COVID-19 was less prevalent among students compared with staff (79% of staff vs. 57% of students). The vaccine’s effectiveness (22%), and its safety (21%), ranked as the two dominant reasons for not getting vaccinated. These concerns were also evident from the DCE, with staff and students being significantly influenced by vaccine effectiveness, with participants preferring highly effective vaccines (90% effective) as compared with those listed as being 70% or 50% effective (β = −3.72, 95% CI = −4.39 to −3.04); this characteristic had the strongest effect on preferences of any attribute. The frequency of vaccination doses was also found to have a significant effect on preferences with participants deriving less utility from choice alternatives requiring two initial vaccine doses compared with one dose (β = −1.00, 95% CI = −1.42 to −0.58) or annual boosters compared with none (β = −2.35, 95% CI = −2.85 to −1.86). Notably, an incentive of ZAR 350 (USD 23.28) did have a positive utility (β = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.53) as compared with no incentive. Given the slow take-up of vaccination among youth in South Africa, this study offers valuable insights into the factors that drive hesitancy among this population. Concerns have been raised around the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, although there remains a predilection for efficient services. Respondents were not enthusiastic about the prospect of having to take boosters, and this has played out in the roll-out data. Financial incentives may increase both the uptake of the initial dose of vaccines and see a more favourable response to subsequent boosters. Universities should consider tailored messaging regarding vaccine effectiveness and facilitate access to vaccines, to align services with the stated preferences of staff and students.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
56.9
作者：
Campos-Mercade, Pol;Meier, Armando N.;Schneider, Florian H.;Meier, Stephan;Pope, Devin;Wengstrom, Erik
通讯作者：
Wengstrom, Erik
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Bou Hamdan M;Singh S;Polavarapu M;Jordan TR;Melhem NM
通讯作者：
Melhem NM
影响因子：
13.8
作者：
Kreps S;Prasad S;Brownstein JS;Hswen Y;Garibaldi BT;Zhang B;Kriner DL
通讯作者：
Kriner DL
影响因子：
7.8
作者：
Baccolini V;Renzi E;Isonne C;Migliara G;Massimi A;De Vito C;Marzuillo C;Villari P
通讯作者：
Villari P
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.2109543118
发表时间：
2021-09-07
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Klüver H;Hartmann F;Humphreys M;Geissler F;Giesecke J
通讯作者：
Giesecke J