ObjectivesEssential healthcare workers (HCW) uniquely serve as both COVID-19 healers and, potentially, as carriers of SARS-CoV-2. We assessed COVID-19-related stigma and bullying against HCW controlling for social, psychological, medical and community variables.DesignWe nested an analytical cross-sectional study of COVID-19-related stigma and bullying among HCW within a larger mixed-methods effort assessing COVID-19-related lived experience and impact. Adjusted OR (aOR) and 95% CIs evaluated the association between working in healthcare settings and experience of COVID-19-related bullying and stigma, controlling for confounders. Thematic qualitative analysis provided insight into lived experience of COVID-19-related bullying.SettingWe recruited potential participants in four languages (English, Spanish, French, Italian) through Amazon Mechanical Turk’s online workforce and Facebook.ParticipantsOur sample included 7411 people from 173 countries who were aged 18 years or over.FindingsHCW significantly experienced more COVID-19-related bullying after controlling for the confounding effects of job-related, personal, geographic and sociocultural variables (aOR: 1.5; 95% CI 1.2 to 2.0). HCW more frequently believed that people gossip about others with COVID-19 (OR: 2.2; 95% CI 1.9 to 2.6) and that people with COVID-19 lose respect in the community (OR: 2.3; 95% CI 2.0 to 2.7), both which elevate bullying risk (OR: 2.7; 95% CI 2.3 to 3.2, and OR: 3.5; 95% CI 2.9 to 4.2, respectively). The lived experience of COVID-19-related bullying relates frequently to public identities as HCW traverse through the community, intersecting with other domains (eg, police, racism, violence).InterpretationAfter controlling for a range of confounding factors, HCW are significantly more likely to experience COVID-19-related stigma and bullying, often in the intersectional context of racism, violence and police involvement in community settings.

BackgroundDeterminants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance are complex; how perceptions of the effectiveness of science, healthcare and government impact personal COVID-19 vaccine acceptance is unclear, despite all three domains providing critical roles in development, funding and provision, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccine.ObjectiveTo estimate impact of perception of science, healthcare systems, and government along with sociodemographic, psychosocial, and cultural characteristics on vaccine acceptance.DesignWe conducted a global nested analytical cross-sectional study of how the perceptions of healthcare, government and science systems have impacted COVID-19 on vaccine acceptance.SettingGlobal Facebook, Instagram and Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk) users from 173 countries.Participants7411 people aged 18 years or over, and able to read English, Spanish, Italian, or French.MeasurementsWe used Χ2 analysis and logistic regression-derived adjusted Odds Ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs to evaluate the relationship between effectiveness perceptions and vaccine acceptance controlling for other factors. We used natural language processing and thematic analysis to analyse the role of vaccine-related narratives in open-ended explanations of effectiveness.ResultsAfter controlling for confounding, attitude toward science was a strong predictor of vaccine acceptance, more so than other attitudes, demographic, psychosocial or COVID-19-related variables (aOR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.8 to 2.5). The rationale for science effectiveness was dominated by vaccine narratives, which were uncommon in other domains.LimitationsThis study did not include participants from countries where Facebook and Amazon mTurk are not available, and vaccine acceptance reflected intention rather than actual behaviour.ConclusionsAs our findings show, vaccine-related issues dominate public perception of science’s impact around COVID-19, and this perception of science relates strongly to the decision to obtain vaccination once available.

Background: NewYork State Department of Health AIDS Institute policy recommends that primary care clinicians should initiate same-day-antiretroviral treatment (ART) of a new HIV diagnosis or at the next clinical visit as the standard of care. However, non-HIV-specialized primary care clinicians might not be sufficiently trained to initiate a specialized ART with a newly HIV diagnosed patient. We assessed clinicians’ knowledge and attitudes toward the rapid initiation of ART and provided academic sessions as a training method to guide clinicians through the implementation of a new standard of care. Methods: A Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-compliant, online survey was sent to primary care clinicians to assess their knowledge and attitudes towards Rapid Initiation of ART (RIA). We provided personalized academic detailing sessions, addressing questions and concerns gathered from both the initial survey and the individual pre-assessment questionnaire completed prior to the sessions. Results: The survey was initially distributed in February 2019, followed by 4weekly reminders. Approximately 585 providers completed the survey. Subsequently, 552 health care providers from 25 out of 62 counties in NY State were detailed between March 2019 and March 2021. Lessons learned from the sessions included the identification of pragmatic strategies that could be used in the design of effective detailing sessions, followed by enhanced clinical knowledge, which improved patient care. Conclusion and Global Health Implications: Inconsistencies in the current testing practices result in missed HIV diagnoses and an increased risk of HIV transmission.Academic detailing-training techniques can be used to respond to clinician-identified key issues/attitudes that may result in a new intervention, suggesting a promising approach in addressing the implementation barriers of of rapid-treatment initiation as the standard of care. The academic detailing approach can be easily adapted and can be beneficial in global public health, HIV/ AIDS control, and other conditions that require a medical practice change.   Copyright © 2022 Barbosu et al. Published by Global Health and Education Projects, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0.

No abstract

No abstract