Search

Objectives: To evaluate COVID-19 burnout syndrome among healthcare workers in Taizhou, China.Methods: A total of 1,103 qualified healthcare workers in Taizhou were included in the study. The Maslach Burnout Inventory–General Survey (MBI-GS) was used to assess burnout syndrome.Results: Among the healthcare workers surveyed, 25.9% experienced COVID-19 burnout syndrome, including 22.3% and 3.6% with mild and moderate burnout, respectively. Multivariate linear regression models revealed associations with emotional exhaustion among healthcare workers, as follows: occupation, education level and professional qualifications. Professional efficacy was impacted by the pandemic, as follows: sex and occupation. The following factors were associated with cynicism among healthcare workers: occupation and underlying disease. Occupation (medical technician vs. physician, β = −7.40, 95% confidence interval: −12.09 to −2.71, p = 0.002) was significantly related to MBI-GS scores after adjusting for confounding factors.Conclusion: COVID-19 burnout syndrome was common among healthcare workers in Taizhou, China, and its impact was more burdensome to physicians.

Purpose This population-based cross-sectional study was conducted to explore whether parents are willing to pay to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 in China. Methods With a self-administered online questionnaire, we investigated parents’ willingness to pay for their children to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in Taizhou, China. Of the 1,845 parents who answered the structured questionnaire when they received an e-mail or e-poster invitation, 1788 samples with valid data underwent data analysis. Results A total of 66.1% of parents reported being willing to pay to inoculate their children with the COVID-19 vaccine. After adjustment for confounding factors, lower education level, one-child family (yes vs. no, OR = 1.35, 95%CI: 1.04–1.74), knowledge score of vaccination against COVID-19 (high vs. low, OR = 1.31, 95%CI: 1.01–1.69), awareness of the permitted use of the vaccine (yes vs. no, OR = 1.51, 95%CI: 1.16–1.97), and willingness to pay for a COVID-19 vaccine for themselves (yes vs. no, OR = 16.31, 95%CI: 12.59–21.14) were significantly associated with parents’ willingness to pay for their children. Conclusion We found that a moderate proportion of parents reported unwillingness to pay for their child to be vaccinated against COVID-19. The results indicate that further detailed assessment and more health education planning are required to increasing parents’ WTP for the vaccination of children in China.

Studies have identified teacher effects on students’ attitudes. This study explored the differences in and associations between teachers’ and students’ COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, and the factors that affect it. A population-based self-administered online survey was conducted to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy of teachers and students in a college in Taizhou, China. A total of 835 valid questionnaires were obtained. All data were analyzed using IBM SPSS statistics 26.0 software. The proportions of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for teachers and students were 31.7%, and 23.8%, respectively. In the binary logistic regression analysis, teachers who perceived the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine as low (OR = 6.794 , 95%CI: 1.701–27.143), did not pay continuous attention to the vaccine news (OR = 3.498, 95%CI: 1.150–10.640), and suffered chronic diseases (OR = 2.659, 95%CI: 1.135–6.227) were more likely to hesitate to get vaccinated against COVID-19. The group of students who perceived the COVID-19 vaccine safety as being low (OR = 1.805, 95%CI: 1.094–2.979) were more hesitant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. While both teachers and students were hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine, teachers were found to be more so. Perceptions regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, attention to and awareness of vaccine news, and chronic medical conditions were the main factors that influenced the hesitation regarding COVID-19 vaccines. Therefore, students’ vaccine hesitancy may depend largely on the perceptions of the vaccine’s safety rather than teachers’ vaccine hesitancy.

This study was conducted to ascertain whether people in China would be willing to pay for an inactivated COVID-19 vaccine booster dose. An online survey estimating participants' willingness to pay (WTP) for a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine was conducted in Taizhou, China. The participants received ane-mail or e-poster on WeChat. A total of 1576 subjects participated the survey. A total of 66.4% (1046/1576) of the respondents were willing to pay for a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine for themselves. Using binary logistic regression analysis, the following factors were significantly related to a WTP for a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine: 1) confidence in the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines (high vs. low, OR: 4.30, 95%CI: 1.61–11.43), 2) confidence in the preventive effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 virus (moderate vs. little, OR: 1.76, 95%CI: 1.30–2.38; great vs. little, OR: 2.244, 95%CI: 1.62–3.12), and 3) COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (unhesitant vs. very unhesitant, OR: 0.67, 95%CI: 0.45–1.02; hesitant vs. very unhesitant, OR: 0.29, 95%CI: 0.19–0.44; very hesitant vs. very unhesitant, OR: 0.09, 95%CI: 0.03–0.27). This study revealed that a moderate proportion of participants responded that they would be willing to pay for a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine. These findings suggest the importance of a detailed assessment and a health education plan that better understands the population’s risk perception as well as the potential health risks in China.

Studies have shown that patients with chronic liver disease are at a higher risk of contracting novel coronavirus pneumonia than healthy individuals, and many guidelines state that patients with chronic liver disease should be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination, but there are a few studies on its safety in CLD patients. We aimed to evaluate the safety of the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine in patients with chronic liver disease, and the effect of anxiety on adverse reactions. A questionnaire survey for self-administered post-vaccination adverse reaction monitoring was conducted from June 17, 2021, to August 11, 2021, in patients with chronic liver disease attending a tertiary care hospital in Taizhou, China. We analyzed the data from of a total of 160 participants who scanned the QR code on social media to respond to the questionnaire. The overall incidence of adverse reactions after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with chronic liver disease was 44.4% (71/160), and the most common adverse reaction was local injection site reaction, accounting for 80.3% of adverse reactions (57/71). No serious adverse reactions were reported. Approximately 53.1% of the patients had anxiety about vaccination, and 51.8% of those who felt anxious reported adverse reactions. The safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with chronic liver disease is good, and there is a strong association between adverse reactions and vaccine anxiety. Pre-vaccination education for patients with vaccine anxiety and psychological counseling may reduce reports of adverse reactions and improve patients’ confidence in the vaccine.

BackgroundSince February 2022, a new Omicron wave of COVID-19 emerged in Shanghai, China. Many healthcare workers came to Shanghai from hospitals of other parts of China as aid workers. Hospitals in areas with mild COVID-19 outbreaks will inevitably be understaffed, it is likely to cause job burnout of stay-behind healthcare workers. Stay-behind healthcare workers were those who had not been dispatched to support COVID-19 prevention and control in other regions. This study was designed to evaluate the burnout among stay-behind healthcare workers in the current COVID-19 Omicron wave in Taizhou, China.MethodsA population-based, anonymous, cross-sectional online survey was designed in the Wen-Juan Xing platform. The survey was sent to all stay-behind healthcare workers of the hospital (n = 1739) from April 29 to May 3, 2022. The Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey (MBI-GS) was used for the burnout survey. For univariate analysis, the χ2 test and one way ANOVA were used to assess differences in categorical variables and continuous variables, respectively. The effect of independent associated risk factors on each type of burnout was examined using the multinomial logistic regression model.ResultsA total of 434 participants completed the survey invitation effectively. A total of 71.2% of stay-behind healthcare workers experienced burnout during COVID-19, including 54.8% experiencing mild to moderate burnout and 16.4% experiencing severe burnout. Night shift, depression, social support, positive coping and number of children appeared to be significantly related to mild to moderate burnout. Night shift, depression, social support, positive coping, number of children, professional title, and anxiety appeared to be significantly related to severe burnout.ConclusionJob burnout among stay-behind healthcare workers was an important problem during the current Omicron wave of COVID-19. Night shift, depression, social support, positive coping, and number of children were associated with mild to moderate and severe burnout. Anxiety and professional title were associated with severe burnout.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to explore COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Chinese adults and analyzed the relationship between knowledge, attitudes, practices (KAP), and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.MethodsA population-based self-administered online survey was conducted in Taizhou, China to evaluate the population's hesitancy to receive COVID-19 vaccination. A total of 2.463 adults received the invitation for the survey through WeChat (A Chinese app that is used for chat, social media, and mobile payment), and 1.788 interviewees answered the structured questionnaire. The overall response rate was 72.6%.ResultsTotal 45.2% of people were hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccination. Using binary logistic regression analysis, we found low perception of safety (Model 3: Odds ratio = 2.977, Confidence interval: 2.237–3.963) and efficacy (Model 3: OR = 1.904, 95%CI: 1.462–2.479) of the COVID-19 vaccine in adults is the most important risk factor for COVID-19 vaccine hesitation. People who know more about COVID-19 vaccination are less hesitant (Model 2: OR = 0.967, 95% CI: 0.951–0.983). People who did not seek information independently about the COVID-19 vaccine are more likely to be skeptical (Model 4: OR = 1.300, 95% CI: 1.058–1.598, P = 0.013).ConclusionIn China, the population had higher levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitation, and their knowledge of the COVID-19 vaccine, perceptions of safety and efficacy, and physical health status were significantly associated with vaccine hesitation. These results provide ideas for promoting COVID-19 vaccination and intervention and have far-reaching implications for further strengthening research on vaccine hesitancy in COVID-19 and exploring strategies for COVID-19 vaccine promotion.

Background: South Africa was the first country with a case of Omicron variant infection diagnosed; therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the impact of the Omicron mutant strain outbreak on the health behavior of the South African population and encourage the population to adopt timely protective behaviors against Omicron mutant strain infection. Study design and methods: This was a population-based, cross-sectional study conducted in Cape Town, South Africa, in December 2021. We distributed 300 questionnaires to adults aged >18 years, and they were all returned. Results: Of the South African population, 60.3% expressed a high level of concern regarding Omicron; 89.3% improved on at least one of the following three health behaviors: mask-wearing, washing hands, and reducing socialization; and only 10.7% exhibited no improvement in health behaviors. Of these, 71.3% and 57.0% increased the length of time they wore a mask and washed their hands, respectively, and 47% decreased the number of times they socialized. Age, residence, education level, chronic disease, and whether they had received the COVID-19 vaccine were significantly different (p

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has changed the social environment of most individuals around the world and has profoundly impacted people's lives, ontological security, and behavior. Among them, the patients are one of the groups most influenced by the pandemic.ObjectiveThe present research aimed to study the relationship of COVID-19 pandemic-induced disruption to patients' daily lives, ontological security, and patients' responses to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and explore the role of ontological security.MethodsThis article was based on an online structured questionnaire study conducted among hospitalized patients in Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Taizhou, China, from 8 July to 11 August 2021. We analyzed the data using the multivariate regression model and mediation analysis method.ResultsThe results showed that the higher the pandemic-induced disruption to inpatients' lives, the better behavior would be taken by hospitalized patients to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and the perceived scarcity of ontological security played a mediating role in this process. Higher pandemic-induced disruption to patients' lives increased the ontological insecurity which further, in turn, reduced patients' good practice toward measures to prevent the novel coronavirus.ConclusionThese findings provided direct evidence for the relationship between pandemic-induced disruption, scarcity of ontological security, and patients' prevention behavior. It suggested that there was a need to emphasize patients' ontological security. Overall, these findings suggested that it is important to emphasize the mental health among patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, and implement strategies to offer psychological support when needed.

This study is conducted to explore the association between health behaviors and the COVID-19 vaccination based on the risk compensation concept among health-care workers in Taizhou, China. We conducted a self-administered online survey to estimate the health behaviors among the staff in a tertiary hospital in Taizhou, China, from May 18 to 21 May 2021. A total of 592 out of 660 subjects (89.7%) responded to the questionnaire after receiving an e-poster on WeChat. Subjects who had been inoculated with the COVID-19 vaccine were asked to mention the differences in their health behaviors before and after the vaccination. The results showed that there were no statistical differences in health behaviors between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, except in terms of the type of gloves they used (62.8% in the vaccinated group and 49.2% in the unvaccinated group, p = .048). Subjects who received earlier COVID-19 vaccinations exhibited better health behaviors (22.40% increased for duration of wearing masks (P = .007), 25.40% increased for times of washing hands (P = .01), and 20.90% increased for times of wearing gloves (P = .01)). Subjects also revealed better health behaviors (washing hands, wearing gloves, and wearing masks) after vaccination compared to that before. In conclusion, concept of risk compensation was not applied in our findings. The health behaviors did not reduce after the COVID-19 vaccination, which even may improve health behaviors among health-care workers in the hospital setting.

Objective: We investigated whether there were sex differences in adverse reactions to an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among medical staff in China.Methods: From 24 February to 7 March 2021 an online cross-sectional survey was conducted with a self-administered COVID-19 vaccine questionnaire among medical staff in Taizhou, China. In total, 1397 interviewees (1,107 women and 290 men) participated in the survey.Results: In our study, 178 (16.1%) women and 23 (7.9%) men reported adverse reactions following their first vaccination, and 169 (15.3%) women and 35 (12.1%) men reported adverse reactions following their second vaccination. After adjusting for confounding factors, adverse reactions to other vaccines, worry about adverse reactions, knowledge of the inactivated vaccine being used in the hospital, taking the vaccine for one's family proactively and receiving an influenza vaccination were significantly related to adverse reactions to both injections in women. In contrast, in men, concerns about adverse reactions independently increased the risk of adverse reactions following either vaccination, and a history of adverse reactions to other vaccines also increased the risk of adverse reactions to both injections.Conclusions: Sex differences in the frequency of reported adverse reactions to an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and potential factors were demonstrated in a sample of medical staff.