Abstract
The recent pandemic reminded the world of the high risk of healthcare workers (HCWs) and patient contagiousness along with the healthcare services disruption related to nosocomial outbreaks. This study aims at describing vaccination campaigns within healthcare institutions of a North-Italian Region and comparing their effectiveness in term of vaccination coverage. In December 2019, we surveyed all healthcare institutions of Friuli Venezia Giulia Region throughout an email questionnaire with 15 questions investigating strategies adopted for the vaccination of HCWs against influenza and other vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), along with actions put in place in case of a VPD exposure. We found a strong heterogeneity in VPDs prevention and control policy and practice for HCWs, along with responsibility attribution ranging among different stakeholders. Strategies adopted to promote vaccination included a wide range of methods, but HCWs’ influenza vaccination coverage still ranged from 17.0 to 33.3%. Contact tracing after a VPD exposure did not always include medical residents and students and visitors/caregivers/extra personnel as possible contacts. Even if knowledge and complacency gaps among HCWs could be faced with education activities, more efforts should be done in identifying and implementing effective vaccination strategies, and mandatory vaccination for HCWs could be introduced to achieve host, herd, and healthcare immunity preventing possible hospital outbreaks.
Highlights
The recent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic [1] once again highlighted the high risk of exposure to communicable diseases of healthcare workers (HCWs) and the threat posed in terms of patients’ contagiousness and healthcare services disruption by nosocomial outbreaks [2]
This study aims at describing HCWs vaccination campaign design within healthcare institutions of a North Italian Region (Friuli Venezia Giulia Region), comparing different strategies considering healthcare institutions’ characteristics and influenza vaccination coverage for 2019–2020 season
Section A asked about who is responsible for the influenza vaccination campaign, strategies adopted to promote vaccination, location and time schedule of vaccination offer, existence and timeliness of vaccination adherence monitoring system, and actions taken in case of denial
Summary
The recent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic [1] once again highlighted the high risk of exposure to communicable diseases of healthcare workers (HCWs) and the threat posed in terms of patients’ contagiousness and healthcare services disruption by nosocomial outbreaks [2]. Patients with pre-symptomatic or even already clinically evident vaccine preventable diseases (VPDs) often seek advice from healthcare services, but the delayed disease recognition along with the late adoption of transmission prevention and control measures can cause hospital outbreaks [2]. On one hand, host and herd immunity can be fostered throughout vaccination campaigns conducted in the community, at-risk group of patients (e.g., immunocompromised, newborns) may just rely on herd immunity to be protected. Much can be done as far as the nosocomial risk of acquiring VPDs by adopting prevention and control measures in healthcare institutions (e.g., personal protective equipment wearing, spatial division), increasing diagnosis preparedness, and reducing the possible reservoir of susceptible subjects represented by unvaccinated HCWs [3]. This study aims at describing HCWs vaccination campaign design within healthcare institutions of a North Italian Region (Friuli Venezia Giulia Region), comparing different strategies considering healthcare institutions’ characteristics and influenza vaccination coverage for 2019–2020 season
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
