The reasons for vaccine hesitancy in Brazil

An analysis based on the perception of health workers who worked during the Covid-19 pandemic

Bibliographic Data

ID3080658
AuthorsMichelle Vieira Fernandez (0000-0003-0224-0991, Universidade de Brasília), Ester Paiva Souto (0000-0002-8168-8585, Instituto Fiocruz, Brasil), Priscila Cardia Petra (0000-0003-3468-2030, Instituto Fiocruz, Brasil), Celita Almeida Rosário (0000-0003-3518-9141, Instituto Fiocruz, Brasil), Patrícia De Lima Lemos (0000-0002-5956-4471, Universidade Federal de Rondonópolis), Flávia Vieira (0000-0002-7474-8850, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco), Gustavo Correa Matta (0000-0002-5422-2798, Instituto Fiocruz, Brasil)
Year2024
Volume33
Issue4
Publication date2024-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSaúde e Sociedade (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0104-1290 • E-ISSN: 1984-0470
PublisherFapUNIFESP (SciELO) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1590/s0104-12902024230854en
OpenAlexW4408740454
SCIELO_PIDS0104-12902024000400407
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited22

The phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy is complex and multifaceted. In this context, the present article analyzes the reasons for vaccine hesitancy perceived by healthcare professionals in their interaction with Brazilian National Health System (SUS) users during COVID-19 vaccination. Interviews were conducted with 86 primary healthcare professionals in four municipalities from different states and the Federal District. The results point to complacency, convenience, confidence, communication, and context as determinants for vaccine hesitancy recognized by healthcare professionals. In the category of complacency, the subcategories "Perception of low risk due to vaccination progress" and "Perception of low risk by downplaying the pandemic" were identified. In the category of convenience, the subcategories "Lack of access to information," "Geographical location of the vaccination site," and "Operation of the vaccination site" were mapped. In the category of confidence, the subcategories "Vaccine brands," "Distrust in the speed of vaccine development," and "Fear of vaccine side effects" were identified. In the analysis of the communication category, the subcategories "False information communicated by healthcare professionals," "False information circulating on social media," and "False information communicated by various political authorities" were identified. Finally, in the category of context, the subcategories "Alignment with political leaders," "Alignment with religious issues," and "Socioeconomic conditions" were identified

2019-20 coronavirus outbreak · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) · Disease · Environmental health · Infectious disease (medical specialty) · Outbreak · Pandemic · Perception · Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) · COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts · Medicine · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy · Virology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access