TY  - JOUR
A1  - Holzmann-Littig, Christopher
A1  - Frank, Tamara
A1  - Schmaderer, Christoph
A1  - Braunisch, Matthias C.
A1  - Renders, Lutz
A1  - Kranke, Peter
A1  - Popp, Maria
A1  - Seeber, Christian
A1  - Fichtner, Falk
A1  - Littig, Bianca
A1  - Carbajo-Lozoya, Javier
A1  - Meerpohl, Joerg J.
A1  - Haller, Bernhard
A1  - Allwang, Christine
T1  - COVID-19 Vaccines: Fear of side effects among German health care workers
JF  - Vaccines
N2  - (1) Background: Health care workers (HCWs) play a key role in increasing anti-COVID vaccination rates. Fear of potential side effects is one of the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. We investigated which side effects are of concern to HCWs and how these are associated with vaccine hesitancy. (2) Methods: Data were collected in an online survey in February 2021 among HCWs from across Germany with 4500 included participants. Free-text comments on previously experienced vaccination side effects, and fear of short- and long-term side effects of the COVID-19 vaccination were categorized and analyzed. (3) Results: Most feared short-term side effects were vaccination reactions, allergic reactions, and limitations in daily life. Most feared long-term side effects were (auto-) immune reactions, neurological side effects, and currently unknown long-term consequences. Concerns about serious vaccination side effects were associated with vaccination refusal. There was a clear association between refusal of COVID-19 vaccination in one's personal environment and fear of side effects. (4) Conclusions: Transparent information about vaccine side effects is needed, especially for HCW. Especially when the participants' acquaintances advised against vaccination, they were significantly more likely to fear side effects. Thus, further education of HCW is necessary to achieve good information transfer in clusters as well.
KW  - COVID-19
KW  - vaccine hesitancy
KW  - health care workers
KW  - side-effects
KW  - fears
Y1  - 2022
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-270561
SN  - 2076-393X
VL  - 10
IS  - 5
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Werner, Anne
A1  - Popp, Maria
A1  - Fichtner, Falk
A1  - Holzmann-Littig, Christopher
A1  - Kranke, Peter
A1  - Steckelberg, Anke
A1  - Lühnen, Julia
A1  - Redlich, Lisa Marie
A1  - Dickel, Steffen
A1  - Grimm, Clemens
A1  - Moerer, Onnen
A1  - Nothacker, Monika
A1  - Seeber, Christian
T1  - COVID-19 intensive care — Evaluation of public information sources and current standards of care in German intensive care units: a cross sectional online survey on intensive care staff in Germany
JF  - Healthcare
N2  - Backround: In February 2021, the first formal evidence and consensus-based (S3) guidelines for the inpatient treatment of patients with COVID-19 were published in Germany and have been updated twice during 2021. The aim of the present study is to re-evaluate the dissemination pathways and strategies for ICU staff (first evaluation in December 2020 when previous versions of consensus-based guidelines (S2k) were published) and question selected aspects of guideline adherence of standard care for patients with COVID-19 in the ICU. Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey among German intensive care staff from 11 October 2021 to 11 November 2021. We distributed the survey via e-mail in intensive care facilities and requested redirection to additional intensive care staff (snowball sampling). Results: There was a difference between the professional groups in the number, selection and qualitative assessment of information sources about COVID-19. Standard operating procedures were most frequently used by all occupational groups and received a high quality rating. Physicians preferred sources for active information search (e.g., medical journals), while nurses predominantly used passive consumable sources (e.g., every-day media). Despite differences in usage behaviour, the sources were rated similarly in terms of the quality of the information on COVID-19. The trusted organizations have not changed over time. The use of guidelines was frequently stated and highly recommended. The majority of the participants reported guideline-compliant treatment. Nevertheless, there were certain variations in the use of medication as well as the criteria chosen for discontinuing non-invasive ventilation (NIV) compared to guideline recommendations. Conclusions: An adequate external source of information for nursing staff is lacking, the usual sources of physicians are only appropriate for the minority of nursing staff. The self-reported use of guidelines is high.
KW  - COVID-19
KW  - implementation
KW  - guideline usage
KW  - guideline adherence
KW  - intensive care
KW  - Germany
KW  - ICU staff
Y1  - 2022
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-281865
SN  - 2227-9032
VL  - 10
IS  - 7
ER  -