Fadda Marta, Bezani Kleona, Amati Rebecca, Fiordelli Maddalena, Crivelli Luca, Albanese Emiliano, Suggs L Suzanne, Caiata-Zufferey Maria
Institute of Public Health, Università della Svizzera italiana, Via Buffi 13, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Department of Business Economics, Health and Social Care, University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Via Violino 11, 6928, Manno, Switzerland.
SSM Qual Res Health. 2022 Dec;2:100181. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100181. Epub 2022 Oct 14.
In January 2021, the Swiss government introduced the first COVID-19 vaccines and prioritized allocation to at-risk individuals and professionals working with them. Despite this opportunity, vaccine uptake among staff employed in retirement homes and institutes for people with disabilities was suboptimal. This study aimed to capture real-time decision-making about COVID-19 vaccine among staff employed in nursing homes and institutes for people with disabilities in Southern Switzerland. We conducted semi-structured phone-interviews with 25 staff employed in retirement homes and institutes for people with disabilities between February and May 2021, i.e., when participants had to decide whether they wanted to adhere to the priority vaccination programme. Among participants, 21 either signed up for the COVID-19 vaccination or were fully or partly vaccinated at the time of the interview. For most participants, the vaccination choice was a challenging process: information appeared to be lacking and conflicting; numerous moral principles were at stake and contradictory; the way vaccination was organized clashed with the health values to which respondents had been previously exposed; finally, the fear of discrimination for those who decided not to get vaccinated loomed over the vaccination choice. Participants decided for or against vaccination based on principles, traditions, emotions, and a reflexive assessment of the personal vs. collective benefit of the vaccination, the latter being the most common within the investigated sample. This study shows that deciding to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is a nuanced process and that individuals cannot simply be categorized as "novax" or "provax" based on their vaccination decision.
2021年1月，瑞士政府引入了首批新冠疫苗，并优先分配给高危人群以及与他们接触的专业人员。尽管有这样的机会，但养老院和残疾人机构工作人员的疫苗接种率并不理想。本研究旨在了解瑞士南部养老院和残疾人机构工作人员关于新冠疫苗的实时决策情况。2021年2月至5月期间，我们对25名养老院和残疾人机构的工作人员进行了半结构化电话访谈，即当参与者必须决定是否要遵守优先接种计划时。在参与者中，有21人要么报名接种新冠疫苗，要么在访谈时已完全或部分接种。对大多数参与者来说，疫苗接种选择是一个具有挑战性的过程：信息似乎不足且相互矛盾；众多道德原则受到影响且相互矛盾；疫苗接种的组织方式与受访者之前所接触的健康价值观相冲突；最后，对未接种疫苗者遭受歧视的担忧笼罩着疫苗接种选择。参与者基于原则、传统、情感以及对疫苗接种个人与集体利益的反思性评估来决定是否接种，后者在被调查样本中最为常见。本研究表明，决定接种新冠疫苗是一个细致入微的过程，不能仅仅根据个人的疫苗接种决定将其简单归类为“反疫苗者”或“支持疫苗者”。
