Psychosocial Dimension of Healthcare Professionals Vaccine Resistance: A Qualitative Study the Case of Turkey

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 543 - 549, 30.06.2022

Nilgün Ulutaşdemir , Sevda Uzun , Nurşen Kulakaç

https://doi.org/10.37989/gumussagbil.1096185

Öz

The purpose of the present study was to examine the reasons for the vaccine resistance of healthcare employees, which may affect public health adversely during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to contribute to the solutions which can be developed. The phenomenological research design, which is a qualitative research design, was used in the study. This qualitative study was conducted with 35 healthcare professionals. Interviews were conducted with the WhatsApp. The data were analyzed by using Colaizzi’s Phenomenological Analysis Method. Two categories, five main themes, and eighteen sub-themes were created in the analysis of the data. There was the theme of psychological effects, physical effects, and social effects in the impact of COVID-19 on the healthcare employee category. There were the themes of lack of trust and risk in the category of reasons for not vaccinating healthcare employees. It was found in the present study that healthcare employees were adversely affected psychologically, physically, and socially during the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 26 healthcare Employees declared that they did not trust the vaccine and did not have it because of the risks, and 9 healthcare employees declared that they had the vaccine because they trusted it. Although the healthcare professionals working in the Southeastern Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia Regions had vaccine rejection in Turkey, healthcare professionals working in the Aegean Region and the Mediterranean Region were those who had the least vaccine rejection.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Healthcare Employees, COVID-19, Vaccine resistance

Sağlık Çalışanlarının Aşıya Direncinin Psikososyal Boyutu: Türkiye Örneği Nitel Bir Çalışma

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, COVID-19 pandemisi sırasında halk sağlığını olumsuz yönde etkileyebilecek sağlık çalışanlarında aşı direncinin nedenlerini incelemek ve geliştirilebilecek çözümlere katkıda bulunmaktır. Araştırmada nitel bir araştırma deseni olan fenomenolojik araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. Araştırma 35 sağlık profesyoneli ile yürütülmüştür. Katılımcılar ile WhatsApp programı ile görüşmeler yapılarak elde edilen veriler Colaizzi'nin Fenomenolojik analiz yöntemi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde iki kategori, beş ana tema ve on sekiz alt tema oluşturulmuştur. Sağlık çalışanı kategorisinde COVID-19'un psikolojik etkileri, fiziksel etkileri ve sosyal etkileri temaları, sağlık çalışanlarının aşı yaptırmama nedenleri kategorisinde güven eksikliği ve risk temaları yer almıştır. Bu çalışmada sağlık çalışanlarının COVID-19 pandemisi sürecinde psikolojik, fiziksel ve sosyal olarak olumsuz etkilendiği tespit edilmiştir. Katılımcılardan 26’sının aşıya güvenmediği ve riskleri nedeniyle aşı yaptırmadığı, 9’unun ise aşıya güvendiği için aşı yaptırdığı belirlendi. Türkiye'de Güneydoğu Anadolu ve Doğu Anadolu Bölgelerinde görev yapan sağlık çalışanları aşı reddi yaşarken, Ege Bölgesi ve Akdeniz Bölgesi'nde görev yapan sağlık çalışanları en az aşı reddi yaşayanlar olmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sağlık çalışanları, COVID-19, Aşı direnci

Kaynakça

• 1. Velavan, T.P. and Meyer, C.G. (2020). The COVID-19 Epidemic. Trop Med Int Health, 25(3), 278-280. https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.13383.
• 2. Guo, Y.R, Cao, Q.D, Hong, Z.S, Tan, Y.Y, Chen, S.D, Jin, H.J. et al. (2020). The Origin, Transmission and Clinical Therapies On Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak - An Update On The Status. Mil Med Res, 7(1), 11.
• 3. Wadman, M. and You, J. (2017). The Vaccine Wars. Science, 356(6336), 364-365.
• 4. Dube, E, Vivion, M, and MacDonald, N.E. (2014). Vaccine Hesitancy, Vaccine Refusal and The Anti-Vaccine movement: Influence, Impact and Implications. Expert Review of Vaccines, 14(1), 99-117.
• 5. Fine, P, Eames, K. and Heymann, D.L. (2011). Herdimmunity: A Roughguide. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 52(7), 911-916.
• 6. T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı. COVID-19 aşısı ulusal uygulama stratejisi. [Accessed July12, 2021]. Accesfrom: https://covid19asi.saglik.gov.tr/TR-77706/covid-19-asisi-ulusal-uygulama-stratejisi.html.
• 7. TRT Haber. Artvin’de COVID-19 aşı çadırları kuruldu. 2021. [Accessed July 12, 2021]. Acces from: https://www.trthaber. com/haber/guncel/artvinde-covid-19-asi-cadirlari-kuruldu-592 955.html.
• 8. World Health Organization. COVID-19 Vaccines. 2019. [Accessed July 12, 2021]. Acces from: https://www.who.int/ emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/covid-19-vacci ne.s
• 9. Bandari, R, Zhou, Z, Qian, H, Tangherlini, T.R. and Roychowdhury, V.P. (2017). A Resistantstrain: Revealing The Online Grass Rootsrise of The Anti Vaccination Movement. Computer. 50(11), 60-67.
• 10. Haque, A. and Pant, A.B. (2020). Efforts At COVID-19 Vaccine Development: Challenges and Successes. Vaccines. 8(4), 739. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines8040739.
• 11. Zadrozny, B, and Edwards E. Anti-Vaccine Group Stake Dangerous Online Harassment into Thereal World. NBC news. 2019. [Accessed May 27, 2021]. Acces from: https://www. nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1096461.
• 12. Puri, N, Coomes, E.A, Haghbayan, H. and Gunaratne, K. (2020). Socialmedia and Vaccine Hesitancy: New Updates for Theera of COVID-19 and Globalized Infectious Diseases. Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, 16(11), 2586-2593. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2020.1780846.
• 13. Yıldırım, A. and Şimşek, H. (2016). Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences, 10th ed. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing. 14. Büyüköztürk, Ş, Kılıç Çakmak, E, Akgün, Ö.E, Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi. 15. Tong, A, Sainsbury, P. and Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ): A 32-Item Checklist for Interviews and Focus Groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqh c/mzm042.
• 16. Colaizzi, P. (1978). Psychological Research as the Phenomenologist’s ViewIt. In: Vale R, King M. editors. Existential-Phenomenological Alternatives for Psychology. New York: Oxford University Pres, 48-71.
• 17. Uskudar, A, Dalkıran, D, Şahin, D, Toprak, O.N, Turk, M.T, Buyers, H.E. and Çöl, M. (2020). Approaches, Attitudes and Related Factors of Ankara University Medical Faculty Term 3 Students to COVID-19 Vaccines. Preliminary report.
• 18. Paul, E, Steptoe, A. and Fancourt, D. (2021). Attitudes Towards Vaccines and Intention To Vaccinate Against COVID-19: Implications for Public Health Communications. Lancet Reg Heal-Eur, 1, 100012.
• 19. Salmon, D.A, Dudley, M.Z, Brewer, J, Kan, L, Gerber, J.E, Budigan, H, Proveaux, T.M, Bernier, R, Rimal, R. and Schwartz B. (2021). COVID-19 vaccination attitudes, values and intentions among United States adults prior to emergency use authorization. Vaccine, 39(19), 2698-2711.
• 20. Dube, E, Laberge, C, Guay, M, Bramadat, P, Roy, R. and Bettinger, J. (2013). Vaccine Hesitancy: an Overview. Hum Vaccin Immunother, 9(8), 1763-1773.
• 21. Lim, W.Y, Jeganathan, N, Rahmat, H, Mustafa, N.A. and Yusof FM. (2016). Exploring Immunisation Refusal by Parents in The Malaysia Ncontext. Cogent Medicine, 3, 1-8.
• 22. Sandhofer, M.J, Robak, O, Frank, H. and Kulnig, J. (2017). Vaccine Hesitancy in Austria: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Wien Klin Wochenschr, 129(1-2), 59-64.
• 23. Hornsey, M.J, Emily, A. and Harris Kelly S. (2018). The psychologicalroots of anti-vaccinationattitudes: A 24-nation investigation. Health Psychology, 37(4), 307-315.
• 24. Lewandowsky, S, Gignac, S.E. and Oberauer, K. (2015). The role of conspiracistıdeation and worldviews in predicting rejection of science. PLOS ONE, 10(8), e75637.