Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Healthcare worker (4) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
Background: The aim of this study was to assess the knowledge and attitudes towards pregnancy-related issues of Zika virus (ZIKV) infection among general practitioners (GPs), a frontline healthcare worker group, in Indonesia.
Methods: A cross-sectional, online survey assessing knowledge and attitudes towards ZIKV infection on multiple-item scales was sent to GPs in the Sumatra and Java islands of Indonesia. The associations between independent factors and either knowledge or attitude were assessed with logistic regressions. The correlation and association between knowledge and attitude were estimated.
Results: We included 457 (53.7%) out of 850 responses in the analysis. Among these, 304 (66.5%) and 111 (24.2%) respondents had a good knowledge and attitude, respectively. No demographic, workplace, professional development, or experiential characteristics related to ZIKV infection were associated with knowledge. In the multivariate analysis, only contact experience was associated with attitude. There was a significant, positive correlation between knowledge and attitude scores.
Conclusions: Although knowledge of pregnancy-related complications of ZIKV infection is relatively high among GPs in Indonesia, more than 75% of them had a poor attitude towards pregnancy-related issues of Zika. Strategies for enhancing the capacity of GPs to develop positive attitudes and respond to ZIKV infection are needed.
Zika virus (ZIKV) infection, a public health emergency of international concern, has recently been confirmed in Indonesia. However, to date, there has been no study to assess how prepared healthcare workers in Indonesia are to confront this emerging infectious disease. The aim of this study was to assess the attitudes of medical doctors in Indonesia towards ZIKV infection and its associated explanatory variables. A cross-sectional self-administered online survey was conducted from 3 May to 3 June 2016 in Aceh province, Indonesia. A pre-tested questionnaire was used to collect data on doctors’ attitudes towards ZIKV infection and a range of explanatory variables (basic demographic data, professional characteristics, workplace characteristics and facilities, and medical experience related to ZIKV infection). Associations between attitude and explanatory variables were assessed using multiple-step logistic regression. We received 631 responses, 424 (67.19%) of which were included in the final analysis. Approximately 64% (271) of doctors had a poor attitude towards ZIKV infection. Experience considering ZIKV infection as a differential diagnosis and attendance at a national conference was associated with a good attitude, with odds ratios (OR) of 3.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15–13.49) and 1.69 (95% CI: 1.03–2.76), respectively. Unexpectedly, doctors who had attended an international conference and those working at places that had molecular diagnostic (polymerase chain reaction based testing) facilities had lower odds of having a good attitude (OR: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.15–0.84] and 0.42 [95% CI: 0.19–0.95], respectively). In conclusion, the attitude towards ZIKV infection is relatively poor among doctors in Aceh. Therefore, strategies for enhancing their capacity to respond to ZIKV infection are needed. The survey concept and tools were well accepted by the participants of this study, suggesting that this rapid assessment could be rolled out across the Indonesian archipelago and elsewhere to identify and regionally differentiate unmet needs of disease and outbreak preparedness.
With respect to nosocomial influenza infections, the welfare of patients is best served by high rates of staff immunity against influenza. However, data from the Centers of Disease Control (CDC) in the USA and the Robert Koch-Institute (RKI) in Germany indicate that most of health care workers (HCWs) choose not to be vaccinated. Under voluntary influenza immunization standards, institutional influenza outbreaks occur every flu season. The question about the legality of implementation mandatory flu vaccination for HCWs is an ongoing debate, which covers several different positions.
To characterize the attitudes of German HCWs toward mandatory influenza immunization, an anonymous questionnaire was offered to HCWs of the University Hospital in Frankfurt/Main / Germany. Our study showed that almost 70% of the respondents would accept mandatory influenza vaccination.
In our opinion an annual influenza vaccination should be required for HCWs who care for immunocompromised patients and residents in long-term care if there will be a failure of voluntary vaccination programs. An informed declination should be obtained from employees who decline vaccination and these HCWs ought to work in uncritical areas of patient care.
ecently, pertussis has become a problem also in the adult population, with incidences even higher than in children. Pediatric health care workers (HCWs) are an important source of transmission, exposing very young and immunocompromised patients to an increased risk of potentially severe pertussis infections. Encouraging HCWs to get vaccinated can play a vital role in stopping the transmission of pertussis, thereby reducing institutional outbreaks.
In Germany, HCWs come up with all sorts of reasons for not getting pertussis vaccination. This study was meant to provide information in order to better understand the backgrounds of these attitudes.
A survey was conducted at the children's university hospital in Frankfurt, using an anonymous questionnaire. Survey results were used to design an intervention to increase the immunization rate of staff. Disappointingly, our efforts to increase the acceptance of the immunization program by providing information in advance were not yet satisfying.
Misconception about pertussis vaccination was prevalent especially among nursing staff. The main reasons for non-compliance included: unawareness of an own risk of infection, the belief that pertussis is not a serious illness, fear of side effects, the belief that the pertussis vaccine might trigger the pertussis disease itself, and skepticism about the efficacy of the pertussis vaccination.