Intern nursing students’ experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit and views on the COVID-19 vaccine: A phenomenological qualitative study

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Improving acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among nursing students is an important strategy for both preventing infection and building public confidence in the vaccine.

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to describe the views of intern nursing students on the COVID-19 vaccine and to evaluate their experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit.

METHODS:

This was a phenomenological qualitative study with a descriptive design. The 46 intern nursing students included in this study were all trained in the COVID-19 vaccination unit. The data was collected at focus group interviews conducted during June 2021 and October 2021.

RESULTS:

The mean age of intern nursing students was 22.78±0.91. From the focus group interviews, two themes were identified regarding the views of intern nursing students on the COVID-19 vaccine and their experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit: Theme 1. Positive views; Theme 2. Negative views. Intern nursing students described that they trust the COVID-19 vaccine and believe in its protection. Intern nursing students who performed their clinical practices in COVID-19 vaccination unit stated that they realized their responsibilities toward patients and the community.

CONCLUSIONS:

From the INSs’ point of view, confidence in the vaccine, responsibility towards patients, their families and the community, and VU practice experience, the health risk associated with COVID-19 positively affected their decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19. The participation of intern nursing students in clinical practice during the pandemic influenced both intern nursing students and population in terms of the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines.

Keywords

COVID-19 clinical experiences clinical training nursing students pandemic qualitative study vaccination

1 Introduction

Since 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating effects on health all over the world. Healthcare services are still struggling to deal with COVID-19 while providing vital care to the public [1]. As the pandemic reveals inadequacies in healthcare systems, it also threatens efforts to combat other infectious diseases and health services for mother–child health, childhood vaccination programs, cancer screening, and family planning [1, 2]. The COVID-19 pandemic is much more than a health crisis, as it also causes serious problems for the economy, society, and healthcare systems. While the effects vary from country to country, the pandemic will certainly increase poverty, unemployment, social distancing, isolation, and global inequality, with serious psychosocial impacts [3 –9]. As a result, rapidly responding to and ending the pandemic have become top priorities all over the world.

Vaccines are currently one of the most effective approaches in tackling the negative consequences of the pandemic and reducing or eliminating the burden of this communicable disease [10 –12]. The development and implementation of safe and effective vaccines is critical to controlling the spread of COVID-19 [13]. However, successful vaccination programs depend not only on effective vaccines but also on high vaccine coverage [14, 15]. The World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes vaccine hesitancy, the behavior of delaying or refusing to accept vaccines, as a global health threat [16].

Healthcare professionals are vital in developing the public’s trust in health and vaccines, and they have an acute understanding of patients’ doubts and concerns [17, 18]. Healthcare workers (HCWs) who have been vaccinated themselves, or are planning to get vaccinated, are also more likely to recommend vaccines [19]. Throughout the pandemic, HCWs have been among the priority groups for vaccination in most countries [20], both because they are faced with a high risk of infection [21] and to provide a sufficient workforce [22]. Nurses are the most vulnerable group of healthcare professionals, as they provide direct care to patients [23]. The pandemic transformed the profession of nursing into a challenging entity, pressuring nurses physically and mentally, as they worked long hours nursing highly demanding patients to compensate for the existing shortage of the manpower [24]. During the pandemic, nursing students (NSs), especially intern nursing students (INSs), were among frontline HCWs in COVID-19 clinics and vaccination units due to the insufficient number of nurses available [25]. However, compared to nurses, NSs are more susceptible to infection because they have less clinical experience and weaker preventive techniques [9]. Achieving a high COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate among NSs is essential, as they play a key role in the healthcare system as future HCWs [26, 27]. Improving acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among NSs is an important strategy for both preventing infection and building public confidence in the vaccine [12]. In addition, it is important to examine the experiences of NSs regarding the COVID-19 vaccine in order to determine the best strategies for the post-pandemic period.

Vaccination of HCWs is important for the protection of both directly themselves and the patients as indirectly, but the rate of their vaccination is not optimal [28]. Although studies have found that intent to be vaccinated among NSs varies between 43% and 81% [9 , 29], vaccine hesitancy appears to be highly context-, vaccine-, and profession-specific [19, 28]. Students that hesitate or refuse to be vaccinated may threaten the effectiveness of vaccination programs. In order to create effective responses, studies are needed to explain the multiple factors and complex structures that lead to vaccine hesitancy [30]. Qualitative research can offer insights into why people engage in particular actions or behaviors and provide in better understanding of a particular topic from the perspective of participants [31]. Therefore, qualitative studies are needed in order to understand the thoughts of NSs about the COVID-19 vaccine [12]. Some qualitative studies have been conducted to describe COVID-19 vaccination intention among HCWs (including a small number of nursing students) [10 , 33]. To date, any qualitative study does not exist that has been conducted on the views on the COVID-19 vaccine and to evaluate their experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit (VU) among NSs. The aim of this study was to describe the views of INSs on the COVID-19 vaccine and to evaluate their experiences in the COVID-19 VU.

2 Methods

2.1 Study design and sampling

This study used a phenomenological qualitative study with a descriptive design to provide straightforward descriptions of the views of INSs on the COVID-19 vaccine and experiences of their experiences in the COVID-19 VU [34]. The phenomenological approach provides a way to understanding people from their own frames of reference and experiencing reality as they experience it. It is very common in the nursing context because it responds to the ‘what’ and ‘how’ of a phenomenon of interest. From June 2021 to October 2021, this study was conducted at a nursing school in Turkey. The participants were selected using the purposive sampling method. The inclusion criteria were intern nursing students enrolled in the fourth year and intern nursing students training in the COVID-19 VU. The exclusion criteria were intern nursing students training except in the VU, and unwilling to participate in this study. All intern nursing students training in the COVID-19 VU in the final year of a four-year baccalaureate nursing program were invited to participate in the study. In the VU, INSs was expected to transport the vaccines in line with the cold chain, obtained a signed vaccination information form from individuals before the COVID-19 vaccination, prepare the vaccines, apply them, and follow the people for 15–30 minutes after the COVID-19 vaccination.

All INSs training in the COVID-19 VU and who agreed to participate in the study were included in the study. None of the invited INSs declined to participate. The interviews were ended when reached data saturation (the point at which no new themes or codes ‘emerged from data). Data saturation was deemed achieved by the eight interviews. A nineth interview was conducted to confirm data saturation. The sample of the study consisted of 46 INSs training in the COVID-19 VU. In total, nine focus group interviews were conducted with a range of four to six participants.

2.2 Data collection

The data was collected at focus group interviews conducted during June 2021 and October 2021, and each lasted between 45 and 80 minutes. All focus group interviews were audio recorded. Data collection continued until the same concepts started to appear. To ensure privacy, the interviews were conducted in a quiet, secluded place at the nursing school. Focus group interviews were conducted by a moderator whose role was to facilitate group discussions by asking detailed questions. All authors participated in all focus group interviews, and one author moderated each interview. All authors have both qualitative research training and experience and are working in the same school as a teacher with nursing students. Researchers’ characteristics are very important because they may influence the qualitative research. During the interviews, participants were given the opportunity to talk openly about their experiences.

Before the interviews started, the INSs were informed about the aim of the study and their consent was obtained. To facilitate the focus group discussions, the interviewers used a semi-structured framework that was developed based on a literature review.

Semi-structured interview framework:

What do you think about the COVID-19 vaccine?

Have you been vaccinated against COVID-19?

If you have been vaccinated, what influenced your decision?

If you have not been vaccinated, what influenced your decision?

What do you have experienced during the training of the COVID-19 vaccine unit?

2.3 Data analyses

All interviews were recorded with a voice recorder and continued until satisfactory data was elicited and the same concepts appeared. The thematic analysis (TA) method was used to analyze data from focus group interviews. The phases of thematic analysis are (1) familiarizing yourself with your data, (2) generating initial codes, (3) searching for themes, (4) reviewing themes, (5) Defining and naming themes, (6) producing the report [35]. Recorded data was documented through verbatim transcription. Researchers read and re-read transcripts and produced codes from the data. Different codes were sorted into themes, emerging themes were exemplified by direct quotes, and what the participants said was exactly described. More than one researcher evaluated the data analysis, different researchers created the codes, sorted themes, and a final version of the themes was agreed on [35]. The trustworthiness of qualitative research relies on four criteria including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability [36]. Investigator triangulation was applied for credibility and two researchers performed data analyses in this research. “Thick description” including descriptive data, sample size, inclusion, and exclusion criteria, research setting, interview process, and interview framework was provided by researchers for transferability. The other two researchers specializing in qualitative research confirmed the accuracy of coding for confirmability. All stages of the research such as data collection and data analyses were explained in detail to ensure the dependability of the research. Another standard for qualitative studies is researcher characteristics and reflexivity which mention researchers’ characteristics, assumptions, and/or presuppositions, potential or actual interaction between researchers’ characteristics, and the research questions, approach, methods, and results [37]. Researchers kept the journal to develop an awareness of their subjectivity for reflexivity in this research.

2.4 Ethical considerations

In order to carry out the study, approval was obtained from the XX University Ethical Committee of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics (06/09-1006) and the institution where the study was conducted. Written informed consent was taken from the INSs fulfilling inclusion criteria and accepting to participate in the study.

3 Results

The mean age of intern nursing students was 22.78±0.91. The majority of participants (n = 37) were women (80.4%) and 19.6% were men (n = 9). From the focus group interviews, two main themes were identified regarding the views of INSs on the COVID-19 vaccine and their experiences in the COVID-19 VU: Theme 1. Positive views; Theme 2. Negative views (Table 1). Several subthemes were also identified –confidence, responsibility towards themselves and others, facilitators, concerns, and resources.

Table 1
Themes and subthemes

Themes Subthemes

Positive views •Confidence

•Responsibility towards themselves and others

•Facilitators

Negative views •Concerns

•Resources

Themes	Subthemes
Positive views	•Confidence
	•Responsibility towards themselves and others
	•Facilitators
Negative views	•Concerns
	•Resources

3.1 Theme 1: Positive views

3.1.1 Confidence

INSs explained that they trust the COVID-19 vaccine and believe in its protection. The fact that there were groups that were vaccinated before them, and that the disease was milder in the vaccinated groups increased their confidence in the vaccine. The INSs stated that the high contagiousness of the newly emerged variants also increased their confidence in the vaccine.

“Getting vaccinated does not mean not being sick. I can get COVID-19 no matter what type of vaccine I choose. But since I have been vaccinated, I will overcome the disease better, I believe in the vaccine.” (INS, 4)

INSs stated that being involved in clinical practice in the COVID-19 VU provided an opportunity observation of people’s vaccination behaviors. They described that people trusted HCWs especially nurses who work in COVID-19 VU about the COVID-19 vaccine.

““People who come to get vaccinated ask me which vaccine I had. They say that you are a healthcare worker and if you have received this vaccine, there is no problem with me.” (INS, 21)

3.1.2 Responsibility towards themselves and others

INSs described that they felt a responsibility towards patients, families, the community, and other colleagues because of working in the COVID-19 VU. Some INSs stated that they were vaccinated to protect them from COVID-19 because they were living with their families. INSs who performed their clinical practices in COVID-19 VU stated that they realized how important the role of the nurse is in vaccination. They mentioned that they can positively impact vaccination decisions of people who come to the COVID-19 VU. INSs stated that being involved in clinical practice in the COVID-19 VU had a positive effect on their perception of vaccines and that they would definitely have the next doses to contribute to herd immunity.

“The COVID-19 VU experience has really positively impacted my perspective on vaccination. I believe that if enough people are vaccinated, we can end the pandemic. I will definitely have my next doses done.”(INS, 33)

Some INSs stated that while working with nurses in COVID-19 VU, they were able to positively affect the vaccination behavior of people by talking to people about their concerns about vaccination and answering their questions. They stated that working on the front lines in COVID-19 VU during the pandemic made them feel responsible to the community.

“I believe that if we can inform many people in the society who are hesitant about vaccination about the COVID-19 vaccine, we can prevent vaccination hesitations.” (INS,22)

3.1.3 Facilitators

The students talked about the factors that facilitated their decision to be vaccinated. They stated that they had their vaccinations done because they would not be able to participate in clinical practices or graduate without being vaccinated. Some INSs stated that their families were worried about them so, because of their insistence, they had the COVID-19 vaccination before clinical training.

“Frankly, I got vaccinated because my family wanted me to get vaccinated, especially because my mother insisted and was afraid I would get COVID-19. I wouldn’t have done it if they hadn’t insisted.” (INS, 1)

INSs described that they prefer to be vaccinated because they think that they are more likely to get COVID-19 than individuals in the community. In particular, the lack of a specific treatment for the disease, the experiences of their relatives and themselves, the difference from person to person of the disease process, and the presence of new or emerging variants further increased the risk perception of the students toward getting sick. This situation reflected positively on the vaccination behaviors of the INSs.

“They are constantly talking about different variants, and each variant is becoming more and more contagious. I am aware that I can get sick even if I follow all protective measures. I’ve been vaccinated so that even if I’m sick, I can get over the disease more easily.” (INS, 19)

3.2 Theme 2: Negative views

3.2.1 Concerns

Some INSs discussed that the decisions to get vaccinated were affected by the side effects of vaccines, lack of information about vaccines, and speculations about COVID-19 vaccines in social media. INSs stated that they experienced anxiety due to the lack of clear data on the protection of the COVID-19 vaccine in the first period of vaccination. The fact that there was only one vaccine at the time of their first vaccination affected the students negatively. INSs stated that they hesitated while deciding whether to have the immunization due to the speculation on social media regarding this vaccine. With the arrival of different vaccines in our country, concerns about vaccine types have begun to vary. In addition, the fact that their friends, who were vaccinated, caught COVID-19 increased the anxiety of the students about the vaccine.

“Many of my friends got COVID-19 even though they were vaccinated. Which really makes me think, how much exactly does the vaccine protect us?” (INS, 7)

INSs who had had the disease before chose not to be vaccinated, either because they thought that their antibodies would protect them or because they had had a mild illness. Some of the students stated that they had hesitations about vaccination due to their current health problems and allergy history. Also, a few INSs who have not had the COVID-19 vaccine described that they approached the disease with a fatalistic perspective.

“I’m not afraid of getting sick because I believe that the more you fear something, the more it will happen to you. God knows what will happen if I experience something like this. I don’t know how long it will protect me even if I get vaccinated.” (INS, 28)

INSs stated that they could observe the concerns and perspectives of the population not only about the COVID-19 vaccine but also about vaccines in general. They described that the population has concerns about COVID-19 vaccine types, vaccine doses, and vaccine protection.

3.2.2 Resources

INSs described that resources of information were lacking about the vaccination process, vaccination side effects, effectiveness, and protection of vaccine, especially in the first period of vaccination. The lack of trusted vaccine information sources was also one of the factors that affected INSs negatively. They described needing more trusted information resources on COVID-19 vaccines.

“We read hundreds of news about vaccines every day on social media, some of them are so convincing that I am inevitably influenced. The absence of an official statement about the protection rate of the vaccine also strengthens these claims.” (INS, 18)

Some INSs discussed that the challenges of access to the COVID-19 vaccine affected their and other people’s uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. They described that there wasn’t enough vaccine for all in the first period of vaccination. The limited supply of COVID-19 vaccines posed challenges in getting COVID-19 vaccination appointments in our country. Also, vaccines could only be accessed from hospitals which led to long queues in VUs and problems in the digital appointment systems.

“Some days the vaccination unit is fully empty because there is no vaccine, but some days it is so crowded that the queues can extend to the garden of the hospital.” (INS,20)

4 Discussion

In this study, INSs stated that the trust in the COVID-19 vaccine had a positive effect on their behavior. In a study conducted by Zhou, Wang, and Lee, it was found that nursing students who do not have sufficient knowledge about vaccines and who do not trust vaccines tend to be indecisive about vaccines [12]. Alshehry et al. found that positive attitudes and beliefs towards the COVID-19 vaccine positively affect decisions about getting vaccinated [38]. The main barriers to vaccination include lack of knowledge and trust, lack of access to vaccines, concerns about the efficacy and safety of vaccines, and religious beliefs [39]. These results show that trust in vaccines is an important determinant of the general population’s behavior concerning vaccinations. Governments, policy makers, and other stakeholders need to build confidence in vaccines through effective education campaigns [18].

Previous studies show that NSs with clinical practice experience are less likely to be vaccinated [12], and there is a negative relationship between clinical practice and vaccine acceptance [40]. However, in this study, INSs felt it was their responsibility to have adequate knowledge about Covid-19 vaccines, get them vaccinated, and inform the population about vaccines. They stated that their VU practice experience had a positive effect on their uptake of COVID-19 vaccines and that they would have their next vaccine dose without delay. For this reason, the participation of NS in clinical practice has a positive effect on the vaccination behavior of INSs as well as on the entire health system.

WHO is believed that healthcare professionals can have a positive impact on the public regarding the administering of COVID-19 vaccines and they can relieve patients’ concerns about newly developed vaccines [41]. HCWs who are hesitant about vaccination may give advice against vaccination that may negatively affect society and may damage the public’s confidence in a vaccine [42]. In this study, the INSs’ experience of the COVID-19 VU, shows that nurses and NSs, who are primary vaccine practitioners, are highly effective in influencing vaccine acceptance. Nurses and NSs working in the COVID-19 VU provide advice to the public on vaccines, counseling those who are hesitant and ensuring that they are vaccinated. The fact that individuals who come to the COVID-19 VU ask whether the nurses and INSs have been vaccinated, ask questions about the types of vaccine, and whether to be vaccinated, clearly shows the power of nurses and INSs in combating vaccination hesitancy.

HCW are more at risk than any other group due to factors such as continued exposure to patients and infection, lack of personal protective equipment, and inadequate infection control training [43, 44]. HCWs are three times more likely to contract COVID-19 than other members of the community [44]. In addition, HCWs are at high risk of transmitting the disease [44, 45]. Despite this evidence, some studies have found that NSs perceive the risk of COVID-19 infection as lower than the general population [12], but also that NSs’ perception of COVID-19 risk is not related to their intention to vaccinate [40, 47]. Alshehry et al., on the other hand, found that high COVID-19 risk perception positively affected vaccination intention [38]. Similarly, in this study, it was found that Covid-19 risk perception positively affected vaccination behavior. The main factors that motivated HCWs to vaccinate were the beliefs that they are at high risk of becoming infected and that they are at risk of infecting their patients, as well as the desire to protect their loved ones [48, 49]. INSs stated that they were vaccinated in clinical practice settings because they felt more at risk against COVID-19 and wanted to protect individuals in their close environments.

Another important facilitator for INSs to get the COVID-19 vaccine was graduation anxiety. Previous studies showed that fears and concerns about graduating occurred most among senior-year nursing students [50, 51]. In this study, INSs are aware that they need to complete their clinical practice to graduate, and this was one of the important reasons why they get vaccinated.

Despite overwhelming evidence of the benefits of immunization, widespread misconceptions and mistrust about vaccine efficacy and safety persist in the community [30]. The phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy exists among HCWs as well as in society [17]. A high rate of vaccination hesitancy has been reported, especially in NSs. This suggests that vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge to combat COVID-19 [14]. In the study conducted by Aci et al., HCWs stated that they did not want to be vaccinated due to the contraindications of the vaccine, the duration of protection, and the uncertainties regarding the benefit–harm balance [52]. These opinions against vaccination also are reinforced by different conspiracy theories and misleading media reports about vaccines circulating predominantly on social media [53]. In this study, INSs related their vaccination hesitation to fatalism, existing health problems, previous COVID-19 infections, and the belief that antibodies will provide future protection, and contraindications. Fatalism is an important factor in the use of health services, health-related decision-making, and participation in health promotion programs [54 –56]. Studies show that fatalistic beliefs affect health behaviors, especially in Muslim societies [54 –56]. In this study, INSs stated that in addition to their previous COVID-19 infections and current illnesses, their fatalistic beliefs prevented them from getting vaccinated. Achieving high vaccination coverage early in HCWs, including NSs, not only provides an adequate workforce to treat infected patients but also allows HCWs to share positive vaccination experiences with patients [22]. During a pandemic, frontline HCWs, including NSs, will play a central role in reassuring patients and the general community that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.

Alshehry et al. found that more than half of nursing students (NSs) used social media as a source of information about vaccines [38]. In this study, it is clearly seen that INSs are negatively affected by social media. The fact that misleading information is effective even on NSs, who can access correct information, indicates that misleading information can be even more effective on society in general. A regular and accurate flow of information on the efficacy rates and side effects, among other things, should be ensured by authorized and official sources. In addition, active demand needs to be developed at the individual level through widespread promotion of vaccine benefits.

The COVID-19 VU allowed the INSs involved in this study to observe society’s concerns about vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Turkey, only one type of inactivated vaccine was administered in the early stages of the pandemic, then the mRNA vaccine and another inactivated vaccine were also used. From the beginning of the vaccination process, all countries in the world began evaluating the different types of vaccines. The perceived superiority of one vaccine type over another began to be questioned by society, and this situation led to difficulties in vaccine acceptance. INSs stated that society’s anxiety was due to a lack of information and that the sharing of information about a vaccine and its side effects on social media, except for that published by authorized institutions, affected society negatively in terms of getting vaccinated. The WHO defined vaccine hesitancy as one of the top ten threats to global health, and “spreading myths about vaccines” was reported as one of the reasons for hesitancy [16]. Due to the recent emergence of the COVID-19 infection and its impact on almost all countries of the world, myths about its spread and transmission far outweigh those for diseases such as leprosy and tuberculosis [57]. Myths can cause confusion and endanger the health of individuals by hindering beneficial practices [57]. In this study, INSs stated that COVID-19 vaccination rates may increase if society’s concerns about the vaccine were addressed and explained through reliable information sources.

Every country was faced with different challenges such as limited vaccine supply, priority groups, logistics, infrastructure, workforce for administrating vaccines, equipment required for vaccination, vaccination delivery sites, and scheduling vaccination appointments in the COVID-19 vaccination. Most European countries (96%) experienced challenges related to the limited supply of COVID-19 vaccines [58]. Similarly, our country also was faced with these challenges in the first period of vaccination, and this negatively affected the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. In this study, INSs described that the limited supply of COVID-19 vaccines and problems with digital appointment systems led to challenges in the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine. Vaccines are the most important part of a long-term strategy for under control of infectious diseases. Therefore, countries should roll out vaccinations rapidly and manage their resources correctly and effectively to protect as many people as possible.

4.1 Limitations

The strength of this study is to describes the views on the COVID-19 vaccine and experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit among INSs. There is a limited study in the literature on this issue. While this study provided precious results to the literature, it had some limitations. This study was only conducted in one Nursing School. Therefore, the results cannot be generalized. There was only two COVID-19 vaccine in Turkey at the time of the study was conducted. This may be effected responses of INSs. Additionally, the views of INSs on COVID-19 vaccination may be influenced by social desirability because COVID-19 vaccine uptake was promoted by the nursing school and the government.

5 Conclusions

In this study, the experiences of INSs working in the COVID-19 VU during the pandemic, and their opinions on the COVID-19 vaccines, were described. The study also provided information about society’s attitude towards the COVID-19 vaccines. From the INSs’ point of view, confidence in the vaccine, responsibility towards patients, families and the community, and VU practice experience, the health risk associated with COVID-19 positively affected their decision to be vaccinated against COVID-19. The INSs stated that the desire to graduate was also an important factor in getting vaccinated. For this reason, it is important that nursing schools give their students clear information about vaccination programs knowing that they will be influencing the vaccination decisions of the students.

As in all parts of society, there is hesitancy about vaccination among HCWs. In this study, it was stated by INSs were negatively affected by the speculations and uncertainties on social media, fatalism, previous COVID-19 disease experience, lack of trusted vaccine information sources, limited vaccine supply, and disruption of the digital vaccine appointment system. The participation of INSs in clinical practice during the pandemic influenced both INSs and society in terms of the uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. For this reason, it was emphasized by the INSs, who will be the future HCWs, that their positive views towards COVID-19 vaccines had a beneficial effect on the public’s view of vaccination.

Ethical approval

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the

Ege University Ethical Committee of Scientific Research and Publication Ethics (decision number: 1006, date of approval: 24 June 2021).

Informed consent

All participants were informed about the study and a signed informed consent form was obtained from the individuals who volunteered to participate in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to all who have contributed to this research.

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work.

References

World Health Organization (WHO). 10 global health issues to track in 2021. 2021. Available at https://www.who.int/news-room/spotlight/10-global-health-issues-to-track-in-2021.(accessed 10 June 2021).

The Lancet Public Health

Will the COVID-19 pandemic threaten the SDGs?

Lancet Public Health. 2020:5.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30189-4.

Calderon-Anyosa

, Kaufman

. Impact of COVID-19 lockdown policy on homicide, suicide, and motor vehicle deaths in Peru. Preventive Medicine. 2021;143:106331.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106331.

Hossain

. The effect of the Covid-19 on sharing economy activities. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2021:280.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124782.

Mehraeen

, Karimi

, Barzegary

, Vahedi

, Afsahi

, Dadras

, Jahanfar

. Predictors of mortality in patients with COVID-19-a systematic review. European Journal of Integrative Medicine. 2020;40:101226.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.eujim.2020.101226.

Nicola

, Alsafi

, Sohrabi

, Kerwan

, Al-Jabir

, Iosifidis

, Agha

. The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): A review. J. Surg. 2020;78:185–93.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.018.

Seyed Alinaghi

, Oliaei

, Kianzad

, Afsahi

, MohsseniPour

, Barzegary

, Sabatier

JM.

. Reinfection risk of novel coronavirus (COVID-19): A systematic review of current evidence World Journal of Virology. 2020;9(5):79–90.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.5501/wjv.v9.i5.79.

Patelarou

, Konstantinidis

, Kartsoni

, Mechili

, Galanis

, Zografakis-Sfakianakis

, Patelarou

. Development and validation of a questionnaire to measure knowledge of and attitude toward COVID-19 among nursing students in Greece. Nurs. Rep. 2020;10(2):82–94.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.3390/nursrep10020012.

Patelarou

, Galanis

, Mechili

, Argyriadi

, Argyriadis

, Asimakopoulou

, ...Patelarou

. Factors influencing nursing students’ intention to accept COVID-19 vaccination: A pooled analysis of seven European countries. Nurse Education Today. 2021;105010:00023.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105010.

10.

Manning

, Gerolamo

, Marino

, Hanson-Zalot

, Pogorzelska- Maziarz

. COVID-19 vaccination readiness among nurse faculty and student nurses. Nurs. Outlook. 2021(21):00023–3.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.outlook.2021.01.019.

11.

Murphy

, Vallières

, Bentall

, Shevlin

, McBride

, Hartman

, Hyland

. Psychological characteristics associated withCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom. Nature Communications. 2021;12(1):1–15.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1038/s41467-020-20226-9

12.

Zhou

, Wang

, Li

. Intention to get vaccinated against COVID-19 among nursing students: A cross-sectional survey. Nurse Education Today. 2021;107, 105152.

13.

Shrotri

, Swinnen

, Kampmann

, Parker

EPK

. An interactive website tracking COVID-19 vaccine development. Lancet Glob. Health. 2021;9(5):e590–e592.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/s2214-109x(21)00043-7.

14.

Dror

, Eisenbach

, Taiber

, Morozov

, Mizrachi

, Zigron

, Srouji

, Sela

. Vaccine hesitancy: The next challenge in the fight against COVID-19. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 2020;35(8):775–9.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1007/s10654-020-00671-y

15.

, Andreadakis

, Kumar

, Román

, Tollefsen

, Saville

, Mayhew

. The COVID-19 vaccine development landscape. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2020;19(5):305–6.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1038/d41573-020-00073-5.

16.

World Health Organization (WHO). Ten health issues WHO will tackle this year. 2019. Available athttps://www.who.int/news-room/eature-stories/tenthreats-to-global-health-in-2019(accessed 24 January 2021).

17.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. (ECDC). Vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers and their patients in Europe –A qualitative study. Stockholm: ECDC; 2015.

18.

World Health Organization (WHO). COVID-19 vaccines: Safety surveillance manual. Module: COVID-19 vaccine safety communication. 2020. Available at https://www.who.int/vaccinesafety/committee/Module Communication.pdf?ua=1(accessed 24 January 2022).

19.

Paterson

, Meurice

, Stanberry

, Glismann

, Rosenthal

, Larson

. Vaccine hesitancy and healthcare providers. Vaccine. 2016;34:6700–6.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.10.042

20.

Dooling

, Marin

, Wallace

, McClung

, Chamberland

, Lee

, Oliver

SE.

The advisory committee on immunization practices’ updated interim recommendation for allocation of COVID-19 Vaccine–United States, December 2020.Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2021;69(5152):1657–60.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.15585/mmwr.mm695152e2.

21.

Chirico

, Nucera

, Magnavita

. COVID- Protecting healthcare workers is a priority. Infect. Control HosEpidemiol. 2020;41(9):1117.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1017/ice.2020.148.

22.

Schaffer DeRoo

, Pudalov

, Fu

. Planning for a COVID-19 vaccination program. JAMA. 2020;323(24):2458–59 ,https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1001/jama.2020.8711.PMID:32421155.

23.

Jackson

, Bradbury-Jones

, Baptiste

, Gelling

, Morin

, Neville

, Smith

. Life in the pandemic: Some reflections on nursing in the context of COVID-19. J. Clin. Nurs. 2020;29(13–14):2041–3.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/jocn.15257

24.

Danesh

, Garosi

, Golmohamadpour

. The COVID-19 Pandemic and nursing challenges: A review of the early literature. Work. 2021;69:23–36.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.3233/WOR-213458

25.

Yılmaz

, Karaman

, Yılmaz

. Intörn hemşirelik öğrencilerinin Koronavirüs (COVID-19) korkusunun aşı karşıtlığına etkisinin incelenmesi. Jour Turk Fam Phy. 2021;12(4):179–91.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.15511/tjtfp.21.00479

26.

Qiao

, Friedman

, Tam

, Zeng

, Li

. Vaccine acceptance among college students in South Carolina: Do information sources and trust in information make a difference? medRxiv. 2020;4.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1101/2020.12.02.20242982

27.

Qiao

, Tam

, Li

Risk exposures, risk perceptions, negative attitudes toward general vaccination, and COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among college students in South Carolina. 2020; medRxiv.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1101/2020.11.26.20239483

28.

Maltezou

, Theodoridou

, Ledda

, Rapisarda

, Theodoridou

. Vaccination of healthcare workers: Is mandatory vaccination needed? Expert Review of Vaccines. 2019;18:5–13.https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2019.1552141

29.

Barello

, Nania

, Dellafiore

, Graffigna

, Caruso

. ‘Vaccine hesitancy’ among university students in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Epidemiology. 2020;35:781–3.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-020-00670-z

30.

Dub'e

, Laberge

, Guay

, Bramadat

, Roy

, Bettinger

. Vaccine hesitancy: An overview. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 2013;9(8):1763–73.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.4161/hv.24657

31.

Neuman

Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited, 2014.

32.

Thaivalappil

, Young

, MacKay

, Pearl

, Papadopoulos

. A qualitative study exploring healthcare providers’ and trainees’ barriers to COVID-19 and influenza vaccine uptake. Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine. 2022;10:695–712.https://doi.org/10.1080/21642850.2022.2106231

33.

Woodhead

, Onwumere

, Rhead

, Bora-White

, Chui

, Clifford

, et alRace, ethnicity and COVID-19 vaccination: A qualitative study of UK healthcare staff. Ethnicity & Health. 2020;27:1555–74.https://doi.org/10.1080/13557858.2021.1936464

34.

Doyle

, McCabe

, Keogh

, Brady

, McCann

. An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing research. Journal of Research in Nursing. 2020;25(5):443–55.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1177/1744987119880234

35.

Braun

, Clarke

. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 2006;3:77–101.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

36.

Stahl

, King

. Expanding approaches for research:Understanding and using trustworthiness in qualitativeresearch. Journal of Developmental Education. 2020;44, 26–28.

37.

Bradbury-Jones

. Enhancing rigour in qualitative health research: Exploring subjectivity through Peshkin’s I’s. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2007;59(3):290–8.

38.

Alshehry

, Cruz

, Alquwez

, Alsharari

, Tork

, Almazan

, Balay-Odao

. Predictors of nursing students’ intention to receive COVID-19 vaccination: A multi-university study in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2022;78(2):446–57.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/jan.15002

39.

World Health Organization (WHO). Vaccination and trust. How concerns arise and the role of communication in mitigating crises. 2017. Available at https://www.euro.who.int/_data/assets/pdf_file/0004/329647/Vaccines-and-trust.PDF(accessed 20 February 2022).

40.

Gagneux-Brunon

, Detoc

, Bruel

, Tardy

, Rozaire

, Frappe

, Botelho-Nevers

. Intention to get vaccinations against COVID-19 in French healthcare workers during the first pandemicwave:Acrosssectionalsurvey. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2021;108:168–73.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.jhin.2020.11.020.

41.

Kwok

, Li

, Wei

, Tang

, Wong

SYS

, Lee

. Influenza vaccine uptake, COVID-19 vaccination intention and vaccine hesitancy among nurses: A survey. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2021;114(12):103854.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103854

42.

Verger

, Fressard

, Collange

, Gautier

, Jestin

, Launay

, Peretti-Watel

Vaccine hesitancy among general practitioners and its determinants during controversies:Anational cross-sectional survey in France. EbioMedicine. 2015;2(8):891–7.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.06.018

43.

Huang

, Lin

, Tang

, Yu

, Zhou

. Special attention to nurses’ protection during the COVID-19 epidemic. Critical Care. 2020;24(1):120.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1186/s13054-020-2841-7

44.

Lai

, Ma

, Wang

, Cai

, Hu

, Wei

, Tan

. Factors associated with mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019. JAMA Network Open. 2020;3(3):e203976.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1001%2Fjamanetworkopen.2020.3976

45.

Nguyen

, Drew

, Graham

, Joshi

, Guo

, Ma

, Davies

. Risk of COVID-19 among front-line healthcareworkers and the general community: A prospective cohort study. The Lancet. Public Health.. 2020;5(9):e475–e483.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30164-X

46.

Gómez-Ochoa

, Franco

, Rojas

, Raguindin

, Roa-Díaz

, Wyssmann

BM,..

Muka

. COVID-19 in health-care workers: A living systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2021;190(1):161–75.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1093/aje/kwaa191

47.

Sherman

, Smith

, Sim

, Aml^ot

, Cutts

, Dasch

, Rubin

, Sevdalis

. COVID-19 vaccination intention in the UK: Results from the COVID-19 vaccination acceptability study (CoVAccS), a nationally representative cross-sectional survey. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 2020;17(6):1612–21.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/21645515.2020.1846397.

48.

Barry

, Temsah

, Alhuzaimi

, Alamro

, Al-Eyadhy

, Aljamaan

, Al-Tawfiq

,COVID-19 vaccine confidence and hesitancy among healthcare workers: A cross-sectional survey from a MERS-CoV experienced nation. MedRxiv, 2020;https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1101/2020.12.09.20246447

49.

Prematunge

, Corace

, McCarthy

, Nair

, Roth

, Suh

, Garber

. Qualitative motivators and barriers to pandemic vs. seasonal influenza vaccination among healthcare workers: A content analysis. Vaccine.. 2014;32(52):7128–34.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.10.023

50.

Kochuvilayil

, Fernandez

, Moxham

, Lord

, Alomari

, Hunt

, Middleton

, Halcomb

. COVID- Knowledge, anxiety, academic concerns and preventative behaviours among Australian and Indian undergraduate nursing students: A cross-sectional study. J. Clin. Nurs. 2021;30:882–91.https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15634

51.

Dewart

, Corcoran

, Thirsk

, Petrovic

. Nursing education in a pandemic: Academic challenges in response to COVID-19. Nurse Educ. Today. 2020;92:104471.https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.nedt.2020.104471

52.

Aci

, Kackin

, Karaaslan

, Ciydem

. Qualitative examination of the attitudes of healthcare workers in Turkey regarding COVID-19 vaccines. International Journal of Nursing Knowledge. 2021;33(2):136–46.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1111/2047-3095.12342

53.

Puri

, Coomes

, Haghbayan

, Gunaratne

. Social media and vaccine hesitancy: New updates for the era of COVID-19 and globalized infectious diseases. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 2020;16(11):2586–93.DOI: 0.1080/21645515.2020.1780846.

54.

Nageeb

, Vu

, Malik

, Quinn

, Cursio

, Padela

. Adapting a religious health fatalism measure for use in Muslim populations. PloS One. 2018;13(11):1–12.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1371/journal.pone.0206898.

55.

Padela

, Gunter

, Killawi

, Heisler

. Religious values and healthcare accommodations: Voices from the American Muslim community. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:708–15.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1007/s11606-011-1965-5.

56.

Wong

, Wong

, Megat Hashim

MMAA

, Han

, Lin

, Hu

, Zhao

, Zimet

, et al Multidimensional social and cultural norms influencing HPV vaccine hesitancy in Asia. Hum Vaccines Immunother. 2020;16(7):1611–22.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/21645515.2020.1756670..

57.

Sahoo

, Padhy

, Ipsita

, Mehra

, Grover

. Demystifying the myths about COVID-19 infection and its societal importance. Asian Journal of Psychiatry. 2020;4:102244.https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102244

58.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Rollout of COVID-19 vaccines in the EU/EEA: Challenges and good practice. 2021. Available at https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications-data/rolloutcovid-19-vaccines-eueea-challenges-and-good-practice(accessed 12 April 2023)

Intern nursing students’ experiences in the COVID-19 vaccination unit and views on the COVID-19 vaccine: A phenomenological qualitative study

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSIONS:

Keywords

1 Introduction

2 Methods

2.1 Study design and sampling

2.2 Data collection

2.3 Data analyses

2.4 Ethical considerations

3 Results

Table 1 Themes and subthemes Themes Subthemes Positive views •Confidence •Responsibility towards themselves and others •Facilitators Negative views •Concerns •Resources

3.1.1 Confidence

3.1.2 Responsibility towards themselves and others

3.1.3 Facilitators

3.2 Theme 2: Negative views

3.2.1 Concerns

3.2.2 Resources

4 Discussion

4.1 Limitations

5 Conclusions

Ethical approval

Informed consent

Conflict of interest

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

Funding

References

Table 1
Themes and subthemes

Themes Subthemes

Positive views •Confidence

•Responsibility towards themselves and others

•Facilitators

Negative views •Concerns

•Resources