Introduction Vaccine hesitancy is a chronic public health threat. This study was carried out to ascertain Maltese healthcare workers' hesitancy to a novel COVID-19 vaccine and correlate this with influenza vaccine uptake. Methods A short, anonymous questionnaire was sent out to all of Malta's government sector healthcare workers via the service's standard email services (11–19/09/2020). A total of 9681 questionnaires were posted electronically, with 10.4% response. Results The proportion of Maltese healthcare workers who will take the influenza vaccine increased significantly. Doctors had the highest baseline uptake and highest likely influenza vaccine uptake next winter. The likely/undecided/unlikely to take a COVID-19 vaccine were 52/22/26% respectively. Males were likelier to take the vaccine. Doctors were the occupation with the highest projected vaccine uptake. Likelihood of taking COVID-19 vaccine was directly related to the likelihood of influenza vaccination. Concerns raised were related to insufficient knowledge about such a novel vaccine, especially unknown long term side effects. Discussion The increased uptake of influenza vaccine is probably due to increased awareness of respiratory viral illness. Doctors may have higher vaccine uptakes due to greater awareness and knowledge of vaccine safety. The proportions of who are likely/undecided/unlikely (half, quarter, quarter respectively) to take a COVID-19 are similar to rates reported in other countries. The higher male inclination to take the vaccine may be due the innate male propensity for perceived risk taking. Shared COVID-19 with influenza vaccine hesitancy implies an innate degree of vaccine reluctance/hesitancy and not merely reluctance based on novel vaccine knowledge gap.

No abstract

Background The long‐term control of COVID‐19 depends on an effective global vaccination strategy. Protecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from serious infection is critical. Malta, a European country, initiated the vaccination roll‐out using Pfizer‐BioNTech COVID‐19 vaccine targeting HCWs. This study determined vaccination adverse effects (AEs) in this cohort. Method An online survey was disseminated to all HCWs via work email (29/3/21 to 9/4/21) to gather AEs regarding pain, redness and swelling at injection site, fever, chills, fatigue, muscle/joint pains, headache, vomiting and diarrhoea severity following each dose (Likert scale). Descriptive, comparative and multiple binary regression analyses were performed. Results A response of 30.30% (n = 1480) was achieved with the commonest AEs being pain at injection site (88.92% CI 95%: 87.21‐90.42), mostly mild (51%) and moderate (43%). Fatigue was reported by 72.97% (CI 95%: 70.65‐75.17), 42% were mild and 41% were moderate. Females reported significantly ( P ≤ .05, respectively) more pain (OR: 1.90), redness (OR: 2.49), swelling at injection site (OR: 1.33), fever (OR: 1.74), chills (OR: 2.32), fatigue (OR: 2.43), muscle (OR: 1.54) and joint pains (OR: 2.01), headache (OR: 2.07) and vomiting (OR: 3.43) when adjusted for age and HCW role. Localised AEs were reported following both vaccine doses unlike systemic AEs that were mostly reported after second doses. Conclusion Vaccination benefits outweigh the minor AEs experienced, with females exhibiting a higher susceptibility. The general low vaccination AEs observed within the HCW cohort is encouraging and should help in allaying vaccine hesitancy among the population.

No abstract

No abstract