Vaccination willingness for COVID-19 among health care workers in Switzerland

  1. Kathrin Zürcher
  2. Catrina Mugglin
  3. Matthias Egger
  4. Sandro Müller
  5. Michael Fluri
  6. Laurence Bolick
  7. Rein Jan Piso
  8. Matthias Hoffmann
  9. Lukas Fenner

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Aims of the study

Vaccination is regarded as the most promising response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed opinions towards COVID-19 vaccination, willingness to be vaccinated, and reasons for vaccination hesitancy among health care workers (HCWs).

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional, web-based survey among 3,793 HCWs in December 2020 in the Canton of Solothurn, Switzerland, before the start of the national COVID-19 vaccination campaign.

Results

Median age was 43 years (interquartile range [IQR] 31-53), 2,841 were female (74.9%). 1,511 HCWs (39.8%) reported willingness to accept vaccination, while 1,114 (29.4%) were unsure, and 1,168 (30.8%) would decline vaccination. Among medical doctors, 76.1% were willing, while only 27.8% of nurses expressed willingness. Among 1,168 HCWs who would decline vaccination, 1,073 (91.9%) expressed concerns about vaccine safety and side effects. The willingness of HCWs to be vaccinated was associated with older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.97, 95%Cl 1.71-2.27) and having been vaccinated for influenza this year (aOR 2.70, 95%Cl 2.20-3.31). HCWs who reported a lack of confidence in government were less likely to be willing to be vaccinated (aOR 0.58, 95%Cl 0.40-0.84), and women were less willing to be vaccinated than men (OR 0.33 (0.28-0.38).

Conclusion

Less than half of HCWs reported willingness to be vaccinated before the campaign start, but proportions varied greatly depending on the profession and workplace. Strategies with clear and objective messages that particularly address the concerns of HCWs are needed if their willingness to be vaccinated is to be increased.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.04.21255203: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableDefinitions: The Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FPOH) defined the following COVID-19 risk groups: persons over the age of 50; those with comorbidities including hypertension, chronic respiratory diseases, diabetes, being immunocompromised, cardiovascular disease, cancer, or obesity (BMI >30); persons who live in a nursing home or long-term care facility; and those who are pregnant.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    The limitations of this study include different response rates among the HCW professions and potential over-representation of hospital-based HCWs. We conducted a web-based cross-sectional online survey in which participation was voluntary but highly supported by the hospital-based personnel. Hospital-based HCWs may be over-represented. HCWs interested in the topic are more likely to respond to the questionnaire, and respondents with biases may select themselves into the sample. This might lead to an overestimation of vaccine hesitancy. Compared to other online surveys, this survey was distributed among specific groups of HCWs to cover this heterogeneous population better. Additionally, attitudes towards vaccination against COVID-19 and willingness to get vaccinated change over time. With more people being vaccinated, acceptance increases, and vaccine hesitancy might decrease. This study’s strength is the inclusion of diverse health care institutions and HCWs who play quite different roles within them. We included HCWs working with varying populations of risk ranging from nursing home residents, hospitalised patients to people living in long-term care facilities. Furthermore, the survey covered the three largest health care providers in the canton of Solothurn.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.07.04.21255203v1 on medRxiv