key: cord-0937587-bvfahsv0 authors: Tanacan, Efsun; Ibis, Ogulcan; Sarac, Gulhan Aksoy; Emeksiz, Mehmet Ali Can; Dincer, Didem; Erdogan, Fatma Gulru title: Perspectives of dermatology specialists and residents on COVID‐19 vaccines: A questionnaire‐based survey date: 2021-08-04 journal: Int J Clin Pract DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.14666 sha: 46457f070c4d0ffd8d9b1955b4cf4f0c0c7d51cb doc_id: 937587 cord_uid: bvfahsv0 BACKGROUND: To evaluate the perspectives of dermatology specialists and residents on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccines. METHODS: Present questionnaire‐based study was conducted on dermatology residents and specialists between January 5 and 20. A non‐validated online questionary evaluating the attitude of the participants about the COVID‐19 vaccine was performed. In the first step of the study, data related to the demographic features, all participants' clinical characteristics, and working conditions were recorded. Thereafter answers given to 12 specific questions were recorded. The study population was divided into two groups: dermatology residents (n = 138) and specialists (n = 159). Mentioned variables were compared between the two defined groups. Furthermore, a correlation analysis was performed to assess the relationship between vaccination acceptance and various study parameters. RESULTS: Majority of the cases had positive attitudes against COVID‐19 vaccines. However, there were significant differences between the resident and specialist groups related to the source of information, working conditions, degree of concern, and type of vaccines. Statistically significant negative, weak correlations were observed for age and duration of medical practice (r = −.128, P = .028; r = −.132, P = .041 respectively). Statistically significant positive weak correlations were observed for chronic diseases, level of knowledge about COVID‐19 vaccines, number of information sources about COVİD‐19, and previous COVİD‐19 infection (r = .133, P = .021; r = .207, P < .001; r = .335, P < .001; r = .176, P = .002 respectively). CONCLUSION: The acceptance of COVID‐19 vaccination may be affected by working conditions, medical experience, level of knowledge and the presence of risk factors for severe disease among dermatology residents and specialists. with the widespread use of telemedicine services are the main strategies to protect dermatologists during the pandemic period. 6 Despite all these, dermatologists have expertise that requires close contact with the patient, and they are at high risk for viral transmission. Additionally, many of them have been assigned to pandemic clinics and intensive care units to reduce the burden on the health system in this extraordinary period. 6 Thus, effectively protecting themselves from the transmission of infection is vital for dermatologists. Inactivated, vector and RNA vaccines have been developed and approved by the health-care authorities in the last month. 7 However, there are on-going debates related to vaccines' efficacy, safety, and accessibility, and some people are hesitant about getting vaccinated. 8 There is no study in the current literature evaluating the attitude of dermatologists towards vaccines to the best of our knowledge. This study aims to evaluate the perspectives of dermatology specialists and residents on COVID-19 vaccines. The present questionnaire-based study was conducted on dermatology residents and specialists between 5 and 20 January. A non-validated online questionnaire evaluating the attitude of the participants about the COVİD-19 vaccine was performed. All physicians who gave the required written permission to participate in the study were included. The study protocol was approved by the Turkish Ministry of Health Ankara City Hospital Ethics Committee. In the first step of the study, data related to the demographic features, participants' clinical characteristics, and working conditions were recorded. Thereafter answers given to 12 specific questions were recorded. The study population was divided into two groups: dermatology residents and specialists. Mentioned variables were compared between the two defined groups. There were 138 and 159 participants in the resident and specialist groups, respectively. Demographic features, clinical characteristics, and working conditions of the two groups were compared in Table 1 . Significantly lower values for age, body-mass index, duration of medical practice, rate of alcohol consumption, chronic diseases, regular check-ups, exercise, number of total and elderly people in the household were observed in the group consisted of residents. On the other hand resident group had significantly higher rates of the male gender, single marital status, working in the university hospital, number of patients treated per week, and working in pandemic clinics (P < .05). A comparison of questionnaire answers between the groups was given in Table 2 . The specialist group reported a higher rate of sufficient information related to the COVID-19 vaccines. They also reported a higher rate of access to information sources related to the vaccines. The resident group had a higher rate for influenza vaccination. Resident group had also reported a higher rate of taking care of a critically ill COVID-19 patient. Furthermore, the resident group had a more positive attitude against the COVID-19 vaccination. However, they had a more negative attitude related to the vaccination of family members. Yet, both groups reported higher rates for the vaccination of family members. The specialist group had more concerns related to the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines. Although inactive vaccines were the most preferred type for both groups, specialist group had a higher demand for mRNA vaccines (P < .05). Correlations analyses between acceptance of vaccination and various study parameters were given in Table 3 . Statistically significant negative weak correlations were observed for age and duration of medical practice. (r = −.128, P = .028; r = −.132, P = .041 • Coronavirus disease 2019 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has a prominent impact on our daily life. • Dermatology practice has also been deeply affected by the pandemic. • This novel infection continues to cause mortality and morbidity, putting a severe burden on the health system. The findings of the present study indicated that the majority of the cases had positive attitudes against COVID-19 vaccines. However, there were significant differences between the resident and specialist groups related to the source of information, working conditions, degree of concern and type of vaccines. Only a very small proportion of the study participants were firmly determined not to be vaccinated. The vaccine development process usually takes years as preclinical evaluation, and three distinct clinical stages should be completed before its validation. 11 However, under extraordinary conditions like pandemics, the development process may be accelerated to decrease infection-related morbidity and mortality. 4 On the other hand, this rapid process leads to confusion and an increased rate of public concern about the efficacy and safety of Inactivated, vector and RNA vaccines are the leading platforms in COVID-19. 4, 7 Each platform has its advantage along with its limitation. 15, 16 However, due to the lack of sufficient information regarding the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines, some part of the community is hesitant about being vaccinated. Furthermore, potential adverse events like anaphylaxis and thrombosis may also affect people's choices. 15, 16 Most probably due to mentioned con- The present study's main strenghts were its novelty, prospective design and relatively high number of participants. However, a relatively low number of questionnaire parameters was the main limitation. In conclusion, the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination may be affected by working conditions, medical experience, level of knowledge and the presence of risk factors for severe disease among dermatology residents and specialists. The authors state that declared no conflicts of interest in this study. The study protocol was approved by Ministry of Health Ankara City Hospital Ethics Committee with reference number E1-21-1508 and informed consent was obtained from all participitants. Data available on request due to privacy/ethical restrictions. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1975-7460 Mehmet Ali Can Emeksiz https://orcid. org/0000-0002-0933-4619 Effects of COVID-19 pandemic in daily life Daily emotional wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic Disease and healthcare burden of COVID-19 in the United States Developing Covid-19 vaccines at pandemic speed COVID vaccination logistics: five steps to take now Changing trends in dermatology practice during COVID-19 pandemic: a single tertiary center experience COVID-19 vaccine: where are we now and where should we go? Vaccine hesitancy'among university students in Italy during the COVID-19 pandemic Turkish Ministry of Health COVID-19 information platform Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: summary of a report of 72,314 cases from the Chinese center for disease control and prevention Vaccines and global health: in search of a sustainable model for vaccine development and delivery Social media and vaccine hesitancy: new updates for the era of COVID-19 and globalized infectious diseases Determinants of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in the US Updated experience of a tertiary pandemic center on 533 pregnant women with COVID-19 infection: a prospective cohort study from Turkey Towards effective COVID-19 vaccines: updates, perspectives and challenges The development of COVID-19 vaccines: safeguards needed Perspectives of dermatology specialists and residents on COVID-19 vaccines: A questionnaire-based survey