Cross-sectional study on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and determinants in healthcare students: interdisciplinary trainings on vaccination are needed.
COVID-19
Education, medical
Universities
Vaccination
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Apr 2022
20 Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
23
11
2021
accepted:
29
03
2022
entrez:
21
4
2022
pubmed:
22
4
2022
medline:
23
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To ensure the success of COVID-19 vaccination, public authorities need to have the support of the entire population and build vaccine confidence. Identifying and understanding the determinants of vaccine acceptance is essential for conducting vaccine strategy. The aim was to estimate vaccine hesitancy among healthcare students in France and to investigate the associated factors. A web-based cross-sectional study was conducted in a large French University in greater Paris area, among 4927 healthcare students from the different training courses such as medicine studies, midwifery studies, physiotherapy studies, nurse studies and others health studies. The study was conducted between January 21 and February 8, 2021 based on a questionnaire including 25 single or multiple-choice questions, made using the free software Limesurvey. The link of the questionnaire was distributed to the students by the teachers and the student associations. The SAGE group definition of vaccine hesitancy was used. All estimates were weighted using the gender and training courses category of all healthcare students registered for the 2020-2021 year. Crude and adjusted weighted odds ratio (wOR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were estimated using logistic regression. A total of 1465 healthcare students answered. A proportion of 44.5% (95%CI = [41.7-47.3]) of them were considered as hesitant. Women were more hesitant (50.9, 95%CI = [48.0-53.9]) than men (21.6, 95%CI = [15.2-28.0]). Vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with gender (wOR = 0.27, 95%CI = [0.18-0.39]) and training courses: medical students were less likely to be hesitant than students in the common and first year of several health studies (wOR = 0.48, 95%CI = [0.33-0.70]) while nursing students were more than 5 times more likely to be hesitant (wOR = 5.20, 95%CI = [3.71-7.28]). Students who did an internship during the epidemic (wOR = 0.53, 95%CI = [0.41-0.69]) and who downloaded the mobile contact-tracing mobile app "TousAntiCovid" (wOR = 0.34, 95%CI = [0.26-0.44]) were significantly less likely to be hesitant. Overall vaccine hesitancy among healthcare students was high, substantial differences were found between training courses. To reduce these disparities, interdisciplinary lectures on vaccines for all healthcare students may be implemented and evaluated.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To ensure the success of COVID-19 vaccination, public authorities need to have the support of the entire population and build vaccine confidence. Identifying and understanding the determinants of vaccine acceptance is essential for conducting vaccine strategy. The aim was to estimate vaccine hesitancy among healthcare students in France and to investigate the associated factors.
METHODS
METHODS
A web-based cross-sectional study was conducted in a large French University in greater Paris area, among 4927 healthcare students from the different training courses such as medicine studies, midwifery studies, physiotherapy studies, nurse studies and others health studies. The study was conducted between January 21 and February 8, 2021 based on a questionnaire including 25 single or multiple-choice questions, made using the free software Limesurvey. The link of the questionnaire was distributed to the students by the teachers and the student associations. The SAGE group definition of vaccine hesitancy was used. All estimates were weighted using the gender and training courses category of all healthcare students registered for the 2020-2021 year. Crude and adjusted weighted odds ratio (wOR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were estimated using logistic regression.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 1465 healthcare students answered. A proportion of 44.5% (95%CI = [41.7-47.3]) of them were considered as hesitant. Women were more hesitant (50.9, 95%CI = [48.0-53.9]) than men (21.6, 95%CI = [15.2-28.0]). Vaccine hesitancy was significantly associated with gender (wOR = 0.27, 95%CI = [0.18-0.39]) and training courses: medical students were less likely to be hesitant than students in the common and first year of several health studies (wOR = 0.48, 95%CI = [0.33-0.70]) while nursing students were more than 5 times more likely to be hesitant (wOR = 5.20, 95%CI = [3.71-7.28]). Students who did an internship during the epidemic (wOR = 0.53, 95%CI = [0.41-0.69]) and who downloaded the mobile contact-tracing mobile app "TousAntiCovid" (wOR = 0.34, 95%CI = [0.26-0.44]) were significantly less likely to be hesitant.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Overall vaccine hesitancy among healthcare students was high, substantial differences were found between training courses. To reduce these disparities, interdisciplinary lectures on vaccines for all healthcare students may be implemented and evaluated.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35443661
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03343-5
pii: 10.1186/s12909-022-03343-5
pmc: PMC9020813
doi:
Substances chimiques
COVID-19 Vaccines
0
Vaccines
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
299Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS One. 2021 May 12;16(5):e0246226
pubmed: 33979340
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022 Apr;42(3):452-460
pubmed: 34155960
Vaccine. 2020 Oct 21;38(45):7049-7056
pubmed: 32980199
Epidemiol Infect. 2021 May 20;149:e132
pubmed: 34011421
JAMA. 2021 Jun 15;325(23):2370-2380
pubmed: 33983379
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2014 Dec;16(12):525
pubmed: 25308393
Euro Surveill. 2021 Jan;26(3):
pubmed: 33478623
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Aug;35(8):781-783
pubmed: 32761440
Vaccine. 2015 Aug 14;33(34):4165-75
pubmed: 25896384
EBioMedicine. 2016 Oct;12:295-301
pubmed: 27658738
J Hosp Infect. 2021 Feb;108:168-173
pubmed: 33259883
Lancet Public Health. 2021 Apr;6(4):e210-e221
pubmed: 33556325
J Med Virol. 2021 Jul;93(7):4280-4291
pubmed: 33644891
J Am Dent Assoc. 2021 Aug;152(8):596-603
pubmed: 34030867
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Aug;35(8):775-779
pubmed: 32785815
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Oct 1;3(10):e2025591
pubmed: 33095252
Lancet Public Health. 2021 Apr;6(4):e195-e196
pubmed: 33556329
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Nov;265:113414
pubmed: 33038683
Eur J Intern Med. 2021 Jul;89:124-125
pubmed: 33966928
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 26;12(1):e0170550
pubmed: 28125629
Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Jan 10;10(1):
pubmed: 35062759
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2021 Nov-Dec;61(6):709-714.e1
pubmed: 34092517