Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL), Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK.
Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL), Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 2023 Sep;333:116146. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116146. Epub 2023 Aug 7.
RATIONALE/OBJECTIVE: Several studies have examined attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines, giving prominence to hesitancy and conceptual models that seek to explain its prevalence, mostly in high-income contexts. An alternative conceptual approach that prioritises an understanding of vaccine concerns, the rationality of the questions people have, the political and media ecologies that raise them, will help recommend ways in which such concerns can be addressed. This current study employs the Spectrum of Vaccine Acceptance as a conceptual framework to explain vaccine concerns, in a low-income context.
A cross-sectional survey was designed by drawing on the extant literature on indirect impacts of COVID-19 pandemic. The survey was administered face to face to a stratified random sample of 459 healthcare professionals in Uganda, from 1st to July 31, 2021. Key findings from the survey were explored using focus group interviews. Descriptive analysis was performed to quantify key responses on socio-demographic characteristics, feelings and views about COVID-19 and vaccines. Qualitative themes from the survey and focus groups were explained through the framework of the Spectrum of Vaccine Acceptance.
Vaccine acceptance was the most dominant attitude among healthcare professionals, with 74.9% of all respondents (N = 224) having been vaccinated. The findings highlight a relationship between vaccine acceptance, vaccine questioning and vaccine hesitancy, in that nearly 60% (N = 127) of those that were already vaccinated had several concerns about the vaccines they had received, suggesting that questions do not necessarily equate to refusal. This led to a partial reframing of the Spectrum of Vaccine Acceptance.
Factors which determine and differentiate vaccine concerns among healthcare professionals in a low-income context show that rational concerns far outweigh non-sensical and conspiratorial views. The findings will act as a useful input into the importance of understanding and addressing vaccine concerns, and the role of managing information voids in pandemic management.
背景/目的：多项研究考察了人们对 COVID-19 疫苗的态度，突出了犹豫不决的态度，并提出了一些概念模型来解释其在高收入环境中的普遍性，这些模型大多是这样的。另一种替代的概念方法，优先考虑对疫苗问题的理解，对人们提出的问题的合理性，提出这些问题的政治和媒体生态，将有助于建议如何解决这些问题。本研究采用疫苗接受度光谱作为概念框架，在低收入环境中解释疫苗问题。
本研究通过借鉴关于 COVID-19 大流行间接影响的现有文献，设计了一项横断面调查。该调查于 2021 年 7 月 1 日至 31 日期间，在乌干达对 459 名医疗保健专业人员进行了分层随机抽样，并进行了面对面调查。使用焦点小组访谈探讨了调查的主要发现。对社会人口特征、对 COVID-19 和疫苗的感受和看法等关键问题进行了描述性分析。通过疫苗接受度光谱框架解释了调查和焦点小组中的定性主题。
疫苗接种接受度是医疗保健专业人员中最主要的态度，74.9%的受访者（N=224）已经接种了疫苗。调查结果突出了疫苗接种接受度、疫苗质疑和疫苗犹豫之间的关系，即近 60%（N=127）已经接种疫苗的人对他们所接种的疫苗有许多担忧，这表明质疑不一定等同于拒绝。这导致了疫苗接受度光谱的部分重新构建。
在低收入环境中决定和区分医疗保健专业人员疫苗问题的因素表明，理性关切远远超过了毫无意义和阴谋论观点。这些发现将为理解和解决疫苗问题的重要性以及在大流行管理中管理信息空白的作用提供有用的参考。
