![conference banner](/images/conference-banner.jpeg)
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of the present study was to determine cancer patients’ attitudes toward the anti-COVID-19 vaccine.
Background: Historically, the scientific community’s responsibility was to investigate attitudes about vaccination. The course of COVID-19 in cancer patients makes them a high priority for vaccination. Cancer patients are at greater risk of serious complications and death because of COVID-19 infection.
Objective: The purpose of the present study was to determine cancer patients’ attitudes toward the anti-COVID-19 vaccine. We examined several constructs that potentially influenced cancer patients' perceptions of the vaccine: health status, knowledge of COVID-19 and vaccination, cancer patients' perceptions of vulnerability, and attitudes toward general vaccines.
Methods: We conducted a collective case study with 200 cancer patients undergoing treatment, and divided the sample into two groups: patients who “expected to heal” (Group A) and patients who “expected to chronicize” (Group B). Data were collected through a purpose-built questionnaire consisting of 22 questions and a study of medical records.
Results: Data analysis showed that both groups, Group A (M= 3.89 SD= 0.64) and Group B (M= 3.98 SD= 0.64), had a favorable attitude toward the anti-COVID-19 vaccine. This favorable attitude toward the anti-COVID-19 vaccine depended on several factors: perception of vulnerability to COVID-19, perception of the severity of their oncological situation, and communication with oncologists.
Conclusion: Our study highlighted the plurality of factors that influence attitudes toward the anti-COVID-19 vaccine. It is therefore of fundamental importance to increase the use of the shared decision-making approach (SDM) to guide the patient to an informed choice.
Keywords: Anti-COVID-19 vaccine, collective case study, cancer, oncological patients, attitudes, shared decision making.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2020.08.019] [PMID: 32979306]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0433] [PMID: 24821919]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021847] [PMID: 21244182]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0034-z]
[PMID: 32522030]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.06.002] [PMID: 31195194]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0256-5] [PMID: 31024188]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.036] [PMID: 25896383]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.10.473] [PMID: 33098994]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-20-1817] [PMID: 33355178]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9050411] [PMID: 33919048]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10654-020-00671-y] [PMID: 32785815]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa433] [PMID: 32282038]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2021.07.048] [PMID: 34649763]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2021.09.007] [PMID: 34663560]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2018.10.016] [PMID: 30470322]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7239.909] [PMID: 10742000]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.4467] [PMID: 28603876]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13187-015-0860-x] [PMID: 25994358]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.09.035] [PMID: 17531434]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.osnem.2021.100124] [PMID: 34604611]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0261] [PMID: 22234632]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvacx.2022.100191] [PMID: 35859887]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6] [PMID: 22618581]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114403] [PMID: 34547544]
![Wayfinder Image](/images/wayfinder.jpg)