660
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Short Report

Perception of the A/H1N1 influenza pandemic and acceptance of influenza vaccination by Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 staff: A descriptive study

, , , &
Pages 727-731 | Received 22 Jul 2014, Accepted 17 Dec 2014, Published online: 03 Apr 2015

Abstract

We assessed the perception and attitudes of university staff, including medical school and other science specialties, toward the 2009 A/H1N1 influenza pandemic and influenza vaccination program. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 4,529 university personnel on October 19–20, 2009. Seven hundred (15%) employees participated in the study. Only 18% were willing to be vaccinated, men more than women (29% versus 9%, P < 0.001), and professors/researchers more than administrative/technical staff (30% vs. 6%, P < 0.001). Intention to be vaccinated was insufficient. Additional efforts are needed to improve information dissemination among university staff. Medical university personnel should receive more information to increase vaccine coverage and protect them as well as patients.

Introduction

In April 2009, the world experienced an influenza pandemic that originated in Mexico.Citation1 On June 11, 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced the scale of the A/H1N1 influenza pandemic that affected 74 countries, for a total of 27,737 cases and 141 deaths.Citation2

In France, the French Institute of Public Health Surveillance confirmed the first case on May 1, 2009.Citation3 Taking WHO recommendations into account,Citation2 the French Government implemented an extensive vaccination campaign as of September 24, 2009. Its plan was implemented in mid-October and focused primarily on vaccination of healthcare workers.Citation4

Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (UCBL) provides teaching to 40,000 students a year in the fields of science and technology, health and sports. UCBL employs 2,900 professors/researchers and teachers, of which 700 are also hospital practitioners (targeted by national and international recommendationsCitation2,5) and 1,800 are technical/administrative staff.

To deal with the A/H1N1 influenza pandemic, the university established a plan for the organization and continuity of activities in case of influenza pandemics. One of the points of this plan was to set up a prevention campaign among university staff and students to protect them during the continuity of activities.

The mission of the Observatory of Healthcare Personnel at UCBL is to report epidemiological results on the health status of university staff.Citation6 A number of studies have investigated the perception of the A/H1N1 influenza as well as the attitudes and factors influencing the pandemic influenza vaccine in the general populationCitation7-10 and healthcare workers,Citation11-15 but few studies focused on university staff.Citation16,17 In the context of a pandemic situation in France, we conducted a study among university employees in October 2009, at the start of the pandemic vaccination plan.

The aims of this survey were (1) to describe perception of the influenza pandemic and (2) to ascertain the attitudes of university staff with respect to pandemic vaccination. The issues raised by this work could be useful in future campaigns of this size and for better management.

Results

Seven hundred (15%) employees participated in the study. Six hundred and ninety-six personnel completed the questionnaire. Three hundred and nineteen (45.9%) were male, 575 (83.3%) were permanent staff, and 352 (51%) were professors/researchers. Mean (minimum-maximum) age of the respondents was 43 (21–68) years.

Perception of A/H1N1 influenza

Nearly 87% of staff had an anxiety level lower than or equal to 5. Average and median anxiety levels were 3.2 and 3, respectively. Women were more anxious than men (3.3 versus 2.9, p=0 .009). Concerning the quantity of information on A/H1N1 influenza received by participants, the majority of university staff (65.8%) stated that they were "sufficiently informed" (). Half of them (52.6%) reported that they were "rather well informed" (). People less than 30 years old said they had been "overly informed": 39% of employees <30-year-olds vs. 28.8% of 30–39-year-olds, 30.6% of 40–49-year-olds, and 28.3% of ≥50 -year-olds. The proportion of "very well informed" staff was greater among ≥40-year-olds (25.1% and 26.6% of 40–49 and ≥50 -year-olds, respectively, versus 13% and 14.6% among those <30-year-olds and 30–39-year-olds, respectively). There were no significant gender or function differences in terms of quantity and quality of information about A/H1N1 influenza.

Figure 1. Quantity of information received about the A/H1N1 pandemic influenza and vaccination against it.

Figure 1. Quantity of information received about the A/H1N1 pandemic influenza and vaccination against it.

Figure 2. Quality of information received about the A/H1N1 pandemic influenza and vaccination against it.

Figure 2. Quality of information received about the A/H1N1 pandemic influenza and vaccination against it.

Information delivered to the general population was inadequate for 64% of personnel. Professors/researchers responded that information was adequate compared to administrative/technical staff (43.1% vs. 28.9%, P < 0.001).

The most commonly-adopted prevention measure was "to wash my hands several times a day with soap or a hand sanitizer" (78%).

Perception of pandemic influenza vaccine

A slight majority of personnel (58.8%) did not intend to be vaccinated when the vaccine became available. Only 18.1% were willing to undergo vaccination, while 23% did not know if they were ready. Men were more willing to be vaccinated than women (29.2% versus 8.8%, P < 0.001). Among professors/researchers, 30.3% were willing to be vaccinated compared to 5.9% of administrative/technical staff (P < 0.001). Personnel <30-year-olds were less ready to be vaccinated than others (<30-year-olds: 6.5% vs. 30–39-year-olds: 15.9%, 40–49-year-olds: 21%, and ≥50-year-olds: 21.7%) ().

Table 1. Characteristics of University Staff Respondents Based on Intention to Get Vaccinated (n = 696)

Concerning quantity of information received about the A/H1N1 influenza vaccine, the majority of university staff stated that they were "sufficiently informed" (40.0%) or "insufficiently informed" (32.8%) (). In contrast, half of them said they were "rather badly informed" (46.9%) in terms of quality of information received (). Among women, 55.2% felt that the risk of the pandemic influenza vaccine to health was "somewhat important" compared to 29.8% of men (P < 0.001). Administrative/technical staff were more likely than professors/researchers (52.5% versus 34.3%, P < 0.001) to think that the risk of the pandemic influenza vaccine to health was "rather important." UCBL staff had many questions about the vaccine. Concerns about side-effects and composition were frequently cited by those surveyed.

Intention to be vaccinated against seasonal influenza vaccine

Among university staff, 59.5% responded that they were not ready to get vaccinated against seasonal flu, as in all winters (). Men were more likely than women (31.7% vs. 22.8%) to get vaccinated every winter. In contrast, 35.5% of professors/researchers were ready to get vaccinated every winter compared to 18.4% of administrative/technical staff. Personnel ≥40-year-olds were ready to be vaccinated every winter (40–49-year-olds: 29.1% and ≥50-year-olds: 38.2% versus <30-year-olds: 7.9% and 30–39-year-olds: 19.3%).

Discussion

The objective of our study was to evaluate UCBL personnel perception of the A/H1N1 influenza pandemic and acceptance of vaccination.

Of the 696 academic staff who responded to the questionnaire, 85.8% had little concern about the risk of a pandemic in France.

Regarding perception of A/H1N1 influenza, staff were well informed quantitatively (65.8%) and qualitatively (52.6%). In general, with the information received on prevention and A/H1N1 influenza, the study population was able to adopt good habits by increasing prevention practices and hygiene, such as hand-washing and the use of hydro-alcoholic solutions. These hygiene measures have had an impact on other communicable diseases, such as gastroenteritis.Citation18

In terms of vaccination against A/H1N1, only 18.1% of staff were willing to submit to it when the vaccine became available. This low percentage was due, among other things, to the fact that they had doubts about vaccination. Several studies showed that the French population was not ready to be vaccinated because it was not convinced about the new vaccine.Citation9,12 Other investigations revealed that, to encourage public vaccination, relevant information must be scientifically-based.Citation7,11,19 In our study, unlike administrative/technical staff, professors/researchers were prepared to be immunized (5.9% vs. 30.3%). By comparison, other investigations among healthcare workers obtained results similar to ours.Citation12,13

Concerning A/H1N1 vaccination, personnel were sufficiently informed (40.0%) quantitatively but poorly informed qualitatively (46.9%). Several studies have also shown that information was poorly communicated.Citation19 Personnel had doubts about vaccine reliability, efficacy and safety. Many investigations posed exactly the same questions as ours.Citation15

With regard to vaccination against seasonal influenza, 59.5% of staff did not want to be vaccinated every winter. Several studies have reported similar findings with vaccines against seasonal influenza, that is to say, the general population did not change their habits.Citation12,15

Many investigations have been conducted among the general populationCitation7,9,10 as well as among studentsCitation20,21 about the influenza pandemic and prevention measures but, to the best of our knowledge, only one of them included university staff.Citation17

Our investigation had some limitations. The results were probably overestimated because of higher response rates among women and permanent staff and the declarative nature of this study. The literature shows that in other studies internet, women lend themselves more readily than men to complete health questionnaires and therefore more involved in the investigation, which is true in our study.Citation6,22,23 One of the reasons advanced is this: women are more often seen as "caregivers" and this, not only for their own health but also for the health of their family or their friends. This would explain their interest in health studies. From similarly, the majority permanent staff in this survey leads us one to think that temporary staff might feel less involved by the life of the university and therefore less concerned to meet intra-university surveys. Second, our study was undertaken before the pandemic vaccine plan was started for the French population and healthcare workers. Thus, acceptance of the A/H1N1 influenza vaccine was measured through attitudes and declared intentions rather than actual observed behaviors. Other studies were based on intention to be vaccinated.Citation14 Finally, information about seasonal vaccination was not confirmed by consulting the medical records. Such verification would have dismissed a possible social desirability bias.Citation14

In conclusion, perception of the A/H1N1 influenza vaccine was poor relative to the quality of information received. Questions asked about vaccine quality disclosed that UCBL personnel were suspicious of the information they were given. Although our findings cannot be extrapolated to the general population, we noticed the same reticence with the pandemic influenza vaccineCitation8,10,24,25 and the seasonal influenza vaccine.Citation26-28 Other studies have clearly demonstrated many controversies throughout information campaigns.Citation19,29,30 They were the source of misunderstanding because of communication problems. In our study, respondents had personal concerns not only about vaccine side-effects, but also about vaccine composition and manufacture that were felt to fall short of dealing with the pandemic. A net decrease in seasonal vaccination occurred after the pandemic.Citation28 Vaccination is a topical subject. Indeed, we observed different attitudes toward vaccination, including its refusal.Citation27,31,32 Rejection has increased with the pandemic influenza vaccine.Citation26,28,29

To improve vaccination against influenza pandemics, future interventions should insist on specific vaccine features and bolster information campaigns to demonstrate their necessity, effectiveness and, especially, their safety.Citation7,11,29,33

Methods

Study population

Our survey was conducted among UCBL employees in Lyon (France). The target population comprised permanent and temporary (more than 10 months) university staff (administrative/technical personnel and professors/researchers). It numbered 4,529 employees in October 2009: 2,574 professors/researchers (including lecturers as well as university hospital teachers), and 1,955 administrative/technical staff, such as librarians, engineers, administrative workers and technicians.

Study design and questionnaire

An email request for study participation was sent on October 19–20, 2009 to all university staff. The survey was undertaken via anonymous self-administered questionnaire available online. It consisted of 15 questions divided into 5 parts: (1) demographic data (4 questions), (2) perception of A/H1N1 influenza (4 questions), (3) prevention measures adopted (1 question), (4) awareness of pandemic vaccination (5 questions), and (5) seasonal influenza (1 question).

The "anxiety scale" for A/H1N1 influenza ranged from 0 (no anxiety) to 10 (high anxiety). A closed question was asked regarding information about A/H1N1 influenza: "Is the information about A/H1N1 influenza issued to the population appropriate?" (Yes/No). An open question was asked regarding concerns about pandemic influenza vaccine: " What are your concerns about pandemic influenza vaccine? ." The quantity and quality of information received on A/H1N1 influenza and the pandemic influenza vaccine were measured on a 4-point scale. Concerning the question of prevention measures adopted, respondents had a choice between: "I wash my hands several times a day with soap or hand sanitizer;" "I cover my mouth and nose with my arm or a tissue when I cough or sneeze;" "I throw my used tissues in a dustbin and wash my hands;" "I limit interactions with individuals (kiss, handshake);" "I keep a physical distance with my interlocutors (colleagues, friends, family)" (more than 1 answer was possible).

This study was approved by the French Data Protection Authority (Commision Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés).

Statistical analyses

Categorical variables were reported as percentages and compared by Fisher's exact test or the Chi2 test. Continuous variables were described as mean (minimum-maximum) and compared by the Mann-Whitney test. These analyses were conducted by SPSS 20.0 for Windows.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Acknowledgments

We thank Mr. Ovid Da Silva for editing this manuscript.

References

  • Update: novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infections - worldwide, May 6, 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2009; 58:453-8
  • World Health Organization (WHO). World now at the start of 2009 influenza pandemic. World Health Organization. 2009 June 11. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2009/h1n1_pandemic_phase6_200906 11/en/index.html, accessed on May 10, 2014
  • Therre H, Gouffé-Benadiba L, Chaussenot TP. La veille et la surveillance pendant la pandémie grippale à virus A(H1N1)2009 : bilan de l'InVS. Saint-Maurice: Institut de veille Sanitaire, 2013. 86.
  • Haut Conseil de la Santé Publique (2009). [Guidance on health priority setting for the use of pandemic vaccines against A(H1N1)v influenza virus]. Avis: Recommandations sur les priorités sanitaires d'utilisation des vaccins pandémiques dirigés contre le virus grippal A(H1N1)v [in French]. Paris: HCSP. Twenty p. http://www.hcsp.fr/docspdf/avisrapports/​hcspa20090907_H1N1.pdf, accessed on May 10, 2014
  • Secrétariat Général de la Défense Nationale (2009). Plan national de prevention et de lutte "Pandémie grippale.” 88p. http://circulaire.legifrance.gouv.fr/pdf/2009/04/cir_1351.pdf, accessed on May 10, 2014
  • Zamora A, Cetre JC, Perol D, Vanhems P. [Collecting health expectations and indicators for teaching staff via the Internet: an original approach of the Observatory for Health Personnel at the University of Lyon]. Sante Publique 2010; 22:37-49; PMID:20441622
  • Nguyen T, Henningsen KH, Brehaut JC, Hoe E, Wilson K. Acceptance of a pandemic influenza vaccine: a systematic review of surveys of the general public. Infect Drug Resist 2011; 4:197-207; PMID:22114512
  • Ofri D. The emotional epidemiology of H1N1 influenza vaccination. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:2594-5; PMID:19940291; http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp0911047
  • Schwarzinger M, Flicoteaux R, Cortarenoda S, Obadia Y, Moatti JP. Low acceptability of A/H1N1 pandemic vaccination in French adult population: did public health policy fuel public dissonance? PLoS One 2010; 5:e10199; PMID:20421908; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010199
  • SteelFisher GK, Blendon RJ, Ward JR, Rapoport R, Kahn EB, Kohl KS. Public response to the 2009 influenza A H1N1 pandemic: a polling study in five countries. Lancet Infect Dis 2012; 12:845-50; PMID:23041199; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(12)70206-2
  • Esteves-Jaramillo A, Omer SB, Gonzalez-Diaz E, Salmon DA, Hixson B, Navarro F, Kawa-Karasik S, Frew P, Morfin-Otero R, Rodriguez-Noriega E, et al. Acceptance of a vaccine against novel influenza A (H1N1) virus among health care workers in two major cities in Mexico. Arch Med Res 2009; 40:705-11; PMID:20304260; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arcmed.2010.01.004
  • Tanguy M, Boyeau C, Pean S, Marijon E, Delhumeau A, Fanello S. Acceptance of seasonal and pandemic a (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccination by healthcare workers in a french teaching hospital. Vaccine 2011; 29:4190-4; PMID:21497636; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.03.107
  • Prematunge C, Corace K, McCarthy A, Nair RC, Pugsley R, Garber G. Factors influencing pandemic influenza vaccination of healthcare workers–a systematic review. Vaccine 2012; 30:4733-43; PMID:22643216; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.05.018
  • Schwarzinger M, Verger P, Guerville MA, Aubry C, Rolland S, Obadia Y, Moatti JP. Positive attitudes of French general practitioners towards A/H1N1 influenza-pandemic vaccination: a missed opportunity to increase vaccination uptakes in the general public? Vaccine 2010; 28:2743-8; PMID:20117271; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.01.027
  • Virseda S, Restrepo MA, Arranz E, Magan-Tapia P, Fernandez-Ruiz M, de la Camara AG, Aguado JM, Lopez-Medrano F. Seasonal and Pandemic A (H1N1) 2009 influenza vaccination coverage and attitudes among health-care workers in a Spanish University Hospital. Vaccine 2010; 28:4751-7; PMID:20471438; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.04.101
  • Mitchell T, Dee DL, Phares CR, Lipman HB, Gould LH, Kutty P, Desai M, Guh A, Iuliano AD, Silverman P, et al. Non-pharmaceutical interventions during an outbreak of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infection at a large public university, April-May 2009. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52 Suppl 1:S138-45; PMID:21342886; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciq056
  • Van D, McLaws ML, Crimmins J, MacIntyre CR, Seale H. University life and pandemic influenza: attitudes and intended behaviour of staff and students towards pandemic (H1N1) 2009. BMC Public Health 2010; 10:130; PMID:20226093; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-130
  • Crepey P, Pivette M, Desvarieux M. Potential impact of influenza A/H1N1 pandemic and hand-gels on acute diarrhea epidemic in France. PLoS One 2013; 8:e75226; PMID:24124479; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075226
  • Chanel O, Luchini S, Massoni S, Vergnaud JC. Impact of information on intentions to vaccinate in a potential epidemic: Swine-origin Influenza A (H1N1). Soc Sci Med 2011; 72:142-8; PMID:21163566; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.11.018
  • Hunt C, Arthur A. Student nurses' reasons behind the decision to receive or decline influenza vaccine: a cross-sectional survey. Vaccine 2012; 30:5824-9; PMID:22828588; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.07.027
  • Seale H, Mak JP, Razee H, MacIntyre CR. Examining the knowledge, attitudes and practices of domestic and international university students towards seasonal and pandemic influenza. BMC Public Health 2012; 12:307; PMID:22537252; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-307
  • Ekman A, Dickman PW, Klint A, Weiderpass E, Litton JE. Feasibility of using web-based questionnaires in large population-based epidemiological studies. Eur J Epidemiol 2006; 21:103-11; PMID:16518678; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10654-005-6030-4
  • Bansil P, Keenan NL, Zlot AI, Gilliland JC. Health-related information on the Web: results from the HealthStyles Survey, 2002-2003. Prev Chronic Dis 2006; 3:A36; PMID:16539777
  • Renner B, Reuter T. Predicting vaccination using numerical and affective risk perceptions: the case of A/H1N1 influenza. Vaccine 2012; 30:7019-26; PMID:23046542; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.09.064
  • d'Alessandro E, Hubert D, Launay O, Bassinet L, Lortholary O, Jaffre Y, Sermet-Gaudelus I. Determinants of refusal of A/H1N1 pandemic vaccination in a high risk population: a qualitative approach. PLoS One 2012; 7:e34054; PMID:22506011; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034054
  • Peretti-Watel P, Verger P, Raude J, Constant A, Gautier A, Jestin C, Beck F. Dramatic change in public attitudes towards vaccination during the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic in France. Euro Surveill 2013; 18; PMID:24176658
  • Velan B, Boyko V, Lerner-Geva L, Ziv A, Yagar Y, Kaplan G. Individualism, acceptance and differentiation as attitude traits in the public's response to vaccination. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2012; 8:1272-82; PMID:22894959; http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/hv.21183
  • Tuppin P, Choukroun S, Samson S, Weill A, Ricordeau P, Allemand H. [Vaccination against seasonal influenza in France in 2010 and 2011: decrease of coverage rates and associated factors]. Presse Med 2012; 41:e568-76; PMID:22795870; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lpm.2012.05.017
  • Poland GA. The 2009-2010 influenza pandemic: effects on pandemic and seasonal vaccine uptake and lessons learned for seasonal vaccination campaigns. Vaccine 2010; 28 Suppl 4:D3-13; PMID:20713258; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.08.024
  • Lin L, Savoia E, Agboola F, Viswanath K. What have we learned about communication inequalities during the H1N1 pandemic: a systematic review of the literature. BMC Public Health 2014; 14:484; PMID:24884634; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-484
  • Yaqub O, Castle-Clarke S, Sevdalis N, Chataway J. Attitudes to vaccination: a critical review. Soc Sci Med 2014; 112:1-11; PMID:24788111; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.04.018
  • Poland GA, Jacobson RM. Understanding those who do not understand: a brief review of the anti-vaccine movement. Vaccine 2001; 19:2440-5; PMID:11257375; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-410X(00)00469-2
  • Fleming DM, Durnall H. Ten lessons for the next influenza pandemic-an English perspective: a personal reflection based on community surveillance data. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2012; 8:138-45; PMID:22251996; http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/hv.8.1.18808

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.