COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among healthcare workers in India: Results from a cross-sectional survey

  1. Kayur Mehta
  2. Baldeep K. Dhaliwal
  3. Sanjay Zodpey
  4. Stacie Loisate
  5. Preetika Banerjee
  6. Paramita Sengupta
  7. Madhu Gupta
  8. Anita Shet

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Remarkable scientific progress has enabled expeditious development of effective vaccines against COVID-19. While healthcare workers (HCWs) have been at the frontline of the pandemic response, vaccine acceptance amongst them needs further study. We conducted a web-based survey to assess vaccine acceptance among HCWs in India between January and February 2021, shortly after the launch of India’s vaccination campaign. Descriptive statistics were used to examine respondent demographics and Likert scale responses. Binomial logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with vaccine acceptance. The survey yielded 624 respondents from 25 states and five union territories in India; 53.5% were male, and median age was 37 years (IQR 32–46). Amongst all respondents, 84.1% (525/624) supported COVID-19 vaccines, and 63.2% (141/223) of those unvaccinated at the time of survey administration were willing to accept a vaccine. Trust in government sources, healthcare providers or scientific journal articles for COVID-19 related information was reported by 66.8%, while confidence in social media for this information was reported by only 4.5%. Amongst those who had not yet received a COVID-19 vaccine, factors independently associated with vaccine acceptance included age (aOR 3.50 [95% CI, 1.04–11.76] for those above 45 years compared to younger HCWs aged 18–29 years), belief in vaccine effectiveness and safety (aOR 3.78 [95% CI 1.15–12.38]), and provision of free/no-cost vaccine (aOR 2.63 [95% CI, 1.06–6.50]). Most respondents (80%) were confident about their hospital being equipped to efficiently rollout COVID-19 vaccines to the general population. While overall attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination were positive among HCWs in India, acceptance was lower among healthier and younger HCWs. Data availability on vaccine safety and effectiveness, and cost considerations were important for acceptance. Targeted interventions are needed to improve vaccine acceptance amongst HCWs, since they are critical in promoting vaccine acceptance amongst the general population.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000661
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.08.10.21261868: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Ethical considerations: The study was reviewed by the Institutional Ethics Committee at the Public Health Foundation of India and by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (JHSPH) Institutional Review Board (IRB) and determined to be exempt from human subjects research oversight.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    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:
    Our study has some limitations that are worth noting. The survey was initiated one week after the initial rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines in India when information, options, and perceptions were rapidly changing. We acknowledge the possibility of selection bias; those who were respondents to our survey may have had strong opinions, whether positive or negative, about vaccination. Responses by the HCWs may have been affected by social desirability bias. Further, this was a cross-sectional survey administered at a single time-point, with no longitudinal follow-up; willingness to get vaccinated may change over time and be influenced by factors such as newer knowledge and the emergence of variants. This survey was conducted during a time when COVID-19 cases were on the decline in India, prior to the second surge, which could have impacted perceptions of individuals responding to our survey. Despite these limitations, our cross-sectional study is strengthened by the fact that we received responses from a diverse group of HCWs from across India. In conclusion, in this cross-sectional survey conducted at the onset of the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in India, we found that amongst a representative group of HCWs in India, overall attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination and preparedness were positive, with the majority willing to accept a vaccine. Favorable vaccine efficacy and provision of vaccination free of cost were significantly associated with acceptance. As HCWs serve as ambass...

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.08.10.21261868v1 on medRxiv