Acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers in Katsina state, Northwest Nigeria

  1. Ahmed Tijani Abubakar
  2. Kabir Suleiman
  3. Suleiman Idris Ahmad
  4. Shamsuddeen Yahaya Suleiman
  5. Umar Bello Ibrahim
  6. Bello Abdullahi Suleiman
  7. Suleiman Ahmed Haladu
  8. Ahmad Ibrahim Al-Mustapha
  9. Musa Imam Abubakar

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

High acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines is crucial to ending the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are frontline responders in the fight against COVID-19, they were prioritized to receive the COVID-19 vaccine in Nigeria. This study assessed the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among HCWs in Katsina State using an online structured questionnaire and predicted variables that could increase the acceptance of the vaccine among HCWs using logistic regression analysis. A total of 793 HCWs were included in this study. Of these, 65.4% (n=519) of them were male and 36.2% (n=287) were aged between 30-39 years. Eighty percent (80%, n=638) of the HCWs have been tested for the SARS-CoV-2 out of which 10.8% (n=65) of them tested positive. The majority of the HCWs (97.3%, n=765) believed that the COVID-19 vaccine was safe and 90% (n=714) of the HCWs have received the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Our findings showed that the age of the HCW, their COVID-19 testing status, and the type of health facility they work (either public or private) were the main predictors for the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among HCWs in Katsina state. HCWs between the age of 30-39 years were more likely (OR:7.06; 95% CI: 2.36, 21.07; p < 0.001) to accept the vaccine than others. In the same vein, HCWs that have been tested for COVID-19 were more likely (OR:7.64; 95% CI: 3.62, 16.16; p < 0.001) to accept the vaccine than those that have not been tested. In addition, HCWs in public health facilities were more likely (OR: 2.91; 95% CI: 1.17, 6.11; p = 0.094) to accept the COVID-19 vaccine than their counterparts in private health facilities. There was a high acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs in Katsina State. More emphasis should be paid on adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions and the availability of vaccines for HCWs in private hospitals.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.03.20.22272677: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: The objective of the study was briefly explained to the participants before a written consent form was administered to each participant.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    RandomizationStudy participants were selected by simple random sampling based on their willingness to participate in the study.
    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 main limitations were the sampling bias because some HFs could not access the online survey.

    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 10.1101/2022.03.20.22272677v1 on medRxiv