The social network around influenza vaccination in health care workers: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

BackgroundInfluenza vaccination coverage remains low among health care workers (HCWs) in many health facilities. This study describes the social network defined by HCWs’ conversations around an influenza vaccination campaign in order to describe the role played by vaccination behavior and other HCW characteristics in the configuration of the links among subjects.MethodsThis study used cross-sectional data from 235 HCWs interviewed after the 2010/2011 influenza vaccination campaign at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona (HCB), Spain. The study asked: “Who did you talk to or share some activity with respect to the seasonal vaccination campaign?” Variables studied included sociodemographic characteristics and reported conversations among HCWs during the influenza campaign. Exponential random graph models (ERGM) were used to assess the role of shared characteristics (homophily) and individual characteristics in the social network around the influenza vaccination campaign.ResultsLinks were more likely between HCWs who shared the same professional category (OR 3.13, 95% CI = 2.61–3.75), sex (OR 1.34, 95% CI = 1.09–1.62), age (OR 0.7, 95% CI = 0.63–0.78 per decade of difference), and department (OR 11.35, 95% CI = 8.17–15.64), but not between HCWs who shared the same vaccination behavior (OR 1.02, 95% CI = 0.86–1.22). Older (OR 1.26, 95% CI = 1.14–1.39 per extra decade of HCW) and vaccinated (OR 1.32, 95% CI = 1.09–1.62) HCWs were more likely to be named.ConclusionsThis study finds that there is no homophily by vaccination status in whom HCWs speak to or interact with about a workplace vaccination promotion campaign. This result highlights the relevance of social network analysis in the planning of health promotion interventions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0522-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Influenza vaccination in healthcare workers: A comprehensive critical appraisal of the literature

“…Llupià and colleagues 53 performed a cross-sectional study recruiting 235 HCWs interviewed after the 2010/2011 influenza vaccination campaign, investigating the impact of social network and the influence of peers on influenza vaccine acceptance among HCWs. They found that links were more likely to occur between HCWs sharing the same professional category, sex, age, and ward/department, but not the same vaccination behavior.…”

Can the Health Belief Model and moral responsibility explain influenza vaccination uptake among nurses?

“…Findings call for the need to revisit the current health promotion strategies, which were mainly initiated by the government. Perceived homophily is important for facilitating action and attitude change (Corace et al., ; Llupià, Puig, Mena, Bayas, & Trilla, ). Nurses might perceive their peers, who have similar background, experiences and concerns with them, as more credible and thus would be more likely to act on their recommendations.…”

“…Moderating role of perceived moral responsibility on the association between HBM variables and intention to receive influenza vaccination in the coming influenza season Notes. ORm: odds ratio derived from multiple logistic regression 95% CI: 95% confidence interval Corace et al, 2013;Llupià, Puig, Mena, Bayas, & Trilla, 2016)…”

A network analysis of patient referrals in two district health systems in Tanzania

“…Studies at the individual level typically analyse complex healthcare situations, mostly in high-income countries. Examples include interpersonal communications during emergency care ( Patterson et al , 2013 ; Hertzberg et al , 2017 ), collaboration during cardiac implants ( Moen et al , 2016 ), influenza vaccination in teams ( Llupià et al , 2016 ) and medicine prescription process ( Boyer et al , 2010 ; Creswick and Westbrook, 2010 ; Chan et al , 2017 ). The studies analysing networks between organizations focus on programme managers implementing development aid projects ( Blanchet and James, 2013 ; Kawonga et al , 2015 ), healthcare provision organization ( Ssengooba et al , 2017 ; Prusaczyk et al , 2019 ) and policy-making processes ( Shearer et al , 2016 , 2014 ).…”