Knowledge, attitudes and practices of high-risk groups towards COVID-19 vaccination in Kampala, Uganda

Résumé fourni par la source

Introduction COVID-19 vaccine uptake is low in less wealthy countries like Uganda, where initial campaigns targeted healthcare workers, teachers, and high-risk individuals. However, this led to vaccine wastage. Literature suggests a connection between knowledge, attitudes, and healthcare service uptake, but specific studies on COVID-19 are scarce. This study assessed the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of high-risk groups regarding COVID-19 vaccination in Kampala, Uganda. Methods A cross-sectional study with mixed methods was conducted involving 576 participants in Kampala. Multistage sampling and a digitised questionnaire gathered data, analysed using Stata 14. Descriptive statistics included means, medians, and standard deviations for continuous variables, and frequencies for categorical variables, presented in tables and figures. The modified Poisson regression model established associations between variables, with content analysis for qualitative findings. Results Of the 576 respondents, 53. 1% were male, 48% aged 18-29, and 63. 5% had tertiary education. Approximately 63. 5% had high knowledge of vaccines, with 70. 5% holding positive attitudes. A total of 76. 76.9% had received a COVID-19 vaccine, predominantly AstraZeneca (63. 2%). Over 60. 1% experienced side effects. Significant factors influencing vaccination included sex, attitude, leadership position, and peer influence. Females had a 3% likelihood of being unvaccinated compared to males, while poor attitudes raised the chance of remaining unvaccinated by 12%. Not holding a leadership position was linked to a 20% likelihood of being unvaccinated, and peer influence was connected to lower vaccination likelihood. Conclusion There is a notable gap in knowledge and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccinations that affects uptake. Key predictors include sex, attitude, leadership position, and peer influence. Targeted community interventions are recommended to address these gaps and counteract negative peer influences that inhibit vaccination.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.