TY - JOUR
T1 - Impact of DHCWs’ Safety Perception on Vaccine Acceptance and Adoption of Risk Mitigation Strategies
AU - Coker, M. O.
AU - Subramanian, G.
AU - Davidow, Amy
AU - Fredericks-Younger, J.
AU - Gennaro, M. L.
AU - Fine, D. H.
AU - Feldman, C. A.
N1 - Funding Information: The authors acknowledge receipt of funding for this research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by the NIH/NIDCR awards X01 DE030407 (Pragmatic Return to Effective Dental Infection Control through Triage and Testing) and National Dental PBRN infrastructure awards, U19 DE028717 and U01 DE02872. Publisher Copyright: © International Association for Dental Research and American Association for Dental, Oral, and Craniofacial Research 2022.
PY - 2023/4
Y1 - 2023/4
N2 - Objectives: To estimate the association between safety perception on vaccine acceptance and adoptions of risk mitigation strategies among dental health care workers (DHCWs). Methods: A survey was emailed to DHCWs in the New Jersey area from December 2020 to January 2021. Perceived safety from regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of self, coworkers, and patients and its association with vaccine hesitancy and risk mitigation were ascertained. Risk Mitigation Strategy (RiMS) scores were computed from groupings of office measures: 1) physical distancing (reduced occupancy, traffic flow, donning of masks, minimal room crowding), 2) personal protective equipment (fitted for N95; donning N95 masks; use of face shields; coverings for head, body, and feet), and 3) environmental disinfection (suction, air filtration, ultraviolet, surface wiping). Results: SARS-CoV-2 testing of dental professionals, coworkers, and patients were perceived to provide safety at 49%, 55%, and 68%, respectively. While dentists were least likely to feel safe with regular self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 (P < 0.001) as compared with hygienists and assistants, they were more willing than hygienists (P = 0.004; odds ratio, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.21 to 2.66]) and assistants (P < 0.001; odds ratio, 3.32 [95% CI, 1.93 to 5.71]) to receive the vaccine. RiMS scores ranged from 0 to 19 for 467 participants (mean [SD], 10.9 [2.9]). RiMS scores did not significantly differ among groups of DHCWs; however, mean RiMS scores were higher among those who received or planned to receive the COVID-19 vaccine than those with who did not (P = 0.004). DHCWs who felt safer with regular testing had greater RiMS scores than those who did not (11.0 vs. 10.3, P = 0.01). Conclusions: Understanding DHCWs’ perception of risk and safety is crucial, as it likely influences attitudes toward testing and implementation of office risk mitigation policies. Clinical studies that correlate risk perception and RiMS with SARS-CoV-2 testing are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of RiMS in dental care settings. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Educators, clinicians, and policy makers can use the results of this study when improving attitudes toward testing and implementation of risk mitigation policies within dental offices, for current and future pandemics.
AB - Objectives: To estimate the association between safety perception on vaccine acceptance and adoptions of risk mitigation strategies among dental health care workers (DHCWs). Methods: A survey was emailed to DHCWs in the New Jersey area from December 2020 to January 2021. Perceived safety from regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of self, coworkers, and patients and its association with vaccine hesitancy and risk mitigation were ascertained. Risk Mitigation Strategy (RiMS) scores were computed from groupings of office measures: 1) physical distancing (reduced occupancy, traffic flow, donning of masks, minimal room crowding), 2) personal protective equipment (fitted for N95; donning N95 masks; use of face shields; coverings for head, body, and feet), and 3) environmental disinfection (suction, air filtration, ultraviolet, surface wiping). Results: SARS-CoV-2 testing of dental professionals, coworkers, and patients were perceived to provide safety at 49%, 55%, and 68%, respectively. While dentists were least likely to feel safe with regular self-testing for SARS-CoV-2 (P < 0.001) as compared with hygienists and assistants, they were more willing than hygienists (P = 0.004; odds ratio, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.21 to 2.66]) and assistants (P < 0.001; odds ratio, 3.32 [95% CI, 1.93 to 5.71]) to receive the vaccine. RiMS scores ranged from 0 to 19 for 467 participants (mean [SD], 10.9 [2.9]). RiMS scores did not significantly differ among groups of DHCWs; however, mean RiMS scores were higher among those who received or planned to receive the COVID-19 vaccine than those with who did not (P = 0.004). DHCWs who felt safer with regular testing had greater RiMS scores than those who did not (11.0 vs. 10.3, P = 0.01). Conclusions: Understanding DHCWs’ perception of risk and safety is crucial, as it likely influences attitudes toward testing and implementation of office risk mitigation policies. Clinical studies that correlate risk perception and RiMS with SARS-CoV-2 testing are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of RiMS in dental care settings. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Educators, clinicians, and policy makers can use the results of this study when improving attitudes toward testing and implementation of risk mitigation policies within dental offices, for current and future pandemics.
KW - COVID-19
KW - Personal Protective Equipment
KW - dental offices
KW - infection control
KW - safety
KW - vaccination hesitancy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125936466&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85125936466&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844211071111
DO - https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844211071111
M3 - Article
C2 - 35191352
SN - 2380-0844
VL - 8
SP - 188
EP - 197
JO - JDR Clinical and Translational Research
JF - JDR Clinical and Translational Research
IS - 2
ER -