Examining the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses among healthcare workers in South Africa : A mixed-methods study
(2023) In PLOS global public health 3(11).- Abstract
This study aimed examin the factors associated with the uptake and non-acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses among healthcare workers (HCWs) in South Africa. We used a mixed-methods design with data from a web-based self-administered survey followed by semi-structured in-depth interviews (IDIs) with selected participants. Of the 6235 HCWs included in our analysis who had fully vaccinated, 3470 (56%) had taken their booster dose with a further 17% intending to get the booster. HCWs aged 35 to 49 years (OR = 1.30 [95% CI: 1.15–1.46]), and those aged 50 years or older (OR = 2.66 [95% CI: 2.32–3.05]) were more likely to get the booster dose. Females were less likely to have received the booster dose (OR = 0.88 [95% CI: 0.79–0.98])... (More)
This study aimed examin the factors associated with the uptake and non-acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses among healthcare workers (HCWs) in South Africa. We used a mixed-methods design with data from a web-based self-administered survey followed by semi-structured in-depth interviews (IDIs) with selected participants. Of the 6235 HCWs included in our analysis who had fully vaccinated, 3470 (56%) had taken their booster dose with a further 17% intending to get the booster. HCWs aged 35 to 49 years (OR = 1.30 [95% CI: 1.15–1.46]), and those aged 50 years or older (OR = 2.66 [95% CI: 2.32–3.05]) were more likely to get the booster dose. Females were less likely to have received the booster dose (OR = 0.88 [95% CI: 0.79–0.98]) with doctors more likely (OR = 1.58 [95% CI: 1.35–1.84]) than Nurses to have received the booster dose. HCWs in direct contact with patients (OR = 1.17 [95% CI: 1.00–1.38]) and who had previously received a flu vaccine (OR = 1.99 [95% CI: 1.56–2.55]) were more likely to have received the booster dose. Four themes emerged from the qualitative data analysis: (1) Vaccination as routine practice among HCWs; (2) Emergence of new COVID-19 variants necessitating vaccine boosters; (3) Fear of potential side-effects; and (4) Limited value of COVID-19 vaccine boosters. Some HCWs broadly accepted the value of vaccination, and believed that boosters were necessary to effectively combat emergent new virus strains, which contrasted with peers who believed that boosters offered little defence against virus mutations. Fear prohibited some HCWs from getting the booster, with some having experienced adverse side effects from their initial vaccination, whilst others were concerned about future complications. Waning booster uptake rates could be arrested through invigorated communication strategies, while effective evidence-based training can potentially create positive normative vaccination practices amongst HCWs.
(Less)
- author
- George, Gavin LU ; Nota, Phiwe ; Strauss, Michael ; Lansdell, Emma ; Peters, Remco P.H. ; Brysiewicz, Petra ; Nadesan-Reddy, Nisha and Wassenaar, Douglas
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023-11
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- PLOS global public health
- volume
- 3
- issue
- 11
- article number
- e0002639
- publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:37983237
- scopus:85195167946
- ISSN
- 2767-3375
- DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002639
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 5b8977b0-be31-4582-9b8f-6d8fcbf5da1d
- date added to LUP
- 2024-10-09 11:44:18
- date last changed
- 2025-07-17 12:04:39
@article{5b8977b0-be31-4582-9b8f-6d8fcbf5da1d,
abstract = {{<p>This study aimed examin the factors associated with the uptake and non-acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses among healthcare workers (HCWs) in South Africa. We used a mixed-methods design with data from a web-based self-administered survey followed by semi-structured in-depth interviews (IDIs) with selected participants. Of the 6235 HCWs included in our analysis who had fully vaccinated, 3470 (56%) had taken their booster dose with a further 17% intending to get the booster. HCWs aged 35 to 49 years (OR = 1.30 [95% CI: 1.15–1.46]), and those aged 50 years or older (OR = 2.66 [95% CI: 2.32–3.05]) were more likely to get the booster dose. Females were less likely to have received the booster dose (OR = 0.88 [95% CI: 0.79–0.98]) with doctors more likely (OR = 1.58 [95% CI: 1.35–1.84]) than Nurses to have received the booster dose. HCWs in direct contact with patients (OR = 1.17 [95% CI: 1.00–1.38]) and who had previously received a flu vaccine (OR = 1.99 [95% CI: 1.56–2.55]) were more likely to have received the booster dose. Four themes emerged from the qualitative data analysis: (1) Vaccination as routine practice among HCWs; (2) Emergence of new COVID-19 variants necessitating vaccine boosters; (3) Fear of potential side-effects; and (4) Limited value of COVID-19 vaccine boosters. Some HCWs broadly accepted the value of vaccination, and believed that boosters were necessary to effectively combat emergent new virus strains, which contrasted with peers who believed that boosters offered little defence against virus mutations. Fear prohibited some HCWs from getting the booster, with some having experienced adverse side effects from their initial vaccination, whilst others were concerned about future complications. Waning booster uptake rates could be arrested through invigorated communication strategies, while effective evidence-based training can potentially create positive normative vaccination practices amongst HCWs.</p>}},
author = {{George, Gavin and Nota, Phiwe and Strauss, Michael and Lansdell, Emma and Peters, Remco P.H. and Brysiewicz, Petra and Nadesan-Reddy, Nisha and Wassenaar, Douglas}},
issn = {{2767-3375}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{11}},
publisher = {{Public Library of Science (PLoS)}},
series = {{PLOS global public health}},
title = {{Examining the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses among healthcare workers in South Africa : A mixed-methods study}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0002639}},
doi = {{10.1371/journal.pgph.0002639}},
volume = {{3}},
year = {{2023}},
}