Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/28007
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorStead, Martineen_UK
dc.contributor.authorCritchlow, Nathanen_UK
dc.contributor.authorPatel, Rupalen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMacKintosh, Anne Marieen_UK
dc.contributor.authorSullivan, Fayen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-22T16:22:03Z-
dc.date.available2018-10-22T16:22:03Z-
dc.date.issued2019-02en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/28007-
dc.description.abstractBackground Uptake of influenza vaccination by healthcare workers (HCWs) may be related to how influenza campaigns are implemented. This study explores differences in annual influenza campaign implementation between NHS trusts (healthcare organisations) with higher and lower vaccine uptake. Methods A cross-sectional survey with influenza campaign staff in 2016/2017 in 87 NHS trusts in England. The survey measured vaccination policy and uptake target, staff involvement, accessibility, use of peer vaccinators, communication strategies, strategies to address HCW concerns, use of incentives, and management support. The analysis considered implementation differences between higher (n Z 50) and lower (n Z 37) uptake trusts. Results and Conclusions Higher uptake trusts were more likely to set higher uptake targets, involve a broader range of staff groups in the campaign, and make the vaccine easy to access by core or hard-toreach HCWs. Higher uptake trusts were also more likely to use a greater range of communication strategies, provide real-time feedback on uptake, provide a greater range of incentives to be vaccinated, and have vaccine uptake considered important by managers. Successful influenza vaccination programmes are multifaceted and involve implementation factors at a strategic, organisational, logistical, and personnel level. Lower uptake trusts could improve uptake by identifying and implementing examples of best practice from higher uptake trusts.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherElsevier BVen_UK
dc.relationStead M, Critchlow N, Patel R, MacKintosh AM & Sullivan F (2019) Improving uptake of seasonal influenza vaccination by healthcare workers: Implementation differences between higher and lower uptake NHS trusts in England. Infection, Disease and Health, 24 (1), pp. 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idh.2018.09.082en_UK
dc.rightsCopyright 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_UK
dc.subjectInfluenzaen_UK
dc.subjectImplementationen_UK
dc.subjectNational health serviceen_UK
dc.subjectFluen_UK
dc.subjectVaccinationen_UK
dc.titleImproving uptake of seasonal influenza vaccination by healthcare workers: Implementation differences between higher and lower uptake NHS trusts in Englanden_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.idh.2018.09.082en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid30541694en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleInfection, Disease and Healthen_UK
dc.citation.issn2468-0451en_UK
dc.citation.volume24en_UK
dc.citation.issue1en_UK
dc.citation.spage3en_UK
dc.citation.epage12en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderPublic Health Research Programmeen_UK
dc.citation.date19/10/2018en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationInstitute for Social Marketingen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationInstitute for Social Marketingen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNatCen Social Research (NatCen)en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationInstitute for Social Marketingen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationNatCen Social Research (NatCen)en_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000456933900002en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85055044694en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1037264en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-3066-4604en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0001-9145-8874en_UK
dc.date.accepted2018-09-05en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-09-05en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2018-10-22en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorStead, Martine|0000-0002-3066-4604en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCritchlow, Nathan|0000-0001-9145-8874en_UK
local.rioxx.authorPatel, Rupal|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMacKintosh, Anne Marie|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorSullivan, Fay|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|Public Health Research Programme|en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2018-10-22en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/|2018-10-22|en_UK
local.rioxx.filename1-s2.0-S2468045118301408-main.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source2468-0451en_UK
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1-s2.0-S2468045118301408-main.pdfFulltext - Published Version283.33 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.