Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T05:08:27.180Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Understanding and Overcoming COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy & Anti-Vaccine Beliefs Within the High Secure Forensic Services

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2022

Karla Giles*
Affiliation:
College of North West London, London, United Kingdom
Anju Soni
Affiliation:
Broadmoor Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Marc Head
Affiliation:
Broadmoor Hospital, London, United Kingdom
William Gewanter
Affiliation:
Broadmoor Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Christina Kalovidouri
Affiliation:
Broadmoor Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Tomasz Tyszuk-smith
Affiliation:
College of North West London, London, United Kingdom
*
*Presenting author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

This is a cross-sectional service evaluation study of the vaccination programme within the high secure setting of Broadmoor hospital with a view of improving the quality of it's delivery. We aimed to establish patients views about COVID-19 vaccinations particularly if there are any themes as to why the patients choose/did not choose to receive the vaccine. This information will be used to help us understand how to overcome vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccine beliefs.

Methods

Patients across Eight wards were asked to participate in the study. 56 patients agreed to be administered the following semi-structured questionnaire by the doctors.

  1. 1. Have you had a COVID-19 vaccine?

  2. 2. Do you think there any advantages to taking a COVID-19 vaccine? Yes/No. If you think there are any advantages, please write these

  3. 3. Do you have any fears or worries about the COVID-19 vaccine? Yes/No. If you do have any fears or worries, please write these.

The results of this were reviewed and put into the categories that are cited below.

Results

14 patients had no vaccination, 2 had one, 38 had two or more.

34 patients said there were advantages, 13 said no advantages and 9 did not know. The themes of the advantages were established: Protects you from bad infection and symptoms (48), stops you from passing it on to others (3), blank (13), others (13) which included “Important to follow government guidelines, proven through history to work, it was offered, I'm more concerned with hepatitis, The doctor would have my best interests.”

30 patients stated that they did have fears and 26 did not. Common themes established were; side effects (17), Not tested correctly/given too quickly (5), Blood clots (2), positive comments (2), blank (22), others (10), which included, “Interaction with medications, more fear about face masks, injecting humanity with something could kill them, infertile generation, Control the public, don't like injections and alter the DNA genome.” The common side effects of concern were “painful arm, fever and headache.”

Conclusion

68% of patients had 2 or more vaccinations across the 8 wards studied. The commonest advantages cited by 86% of patients was to protect themselves from serious illness. The commonest fears or worries were of side-effects that result from the vaccine, although 46% patients had no worries and 39% gave no explanation for fears or worries. The fears and worries appeared mainly related to vaccine hesitancy rather than fixed generalised anti- vaccine views.

Type
Service Evaluation
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.