Abstract
Purpose Healthcare workers (HCWs) play a critical role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. Early in the pandemic, urban centres were hit hardest globally; rural areas gradually became more impacted. We compared COVID-19 infection and vaccine uptake in HCWs living in urban versus rural locations within, and between, two health authorities in British Columbia (BC), Canada. We also analyzed the impact of a vaccine mandate for HCWs.
Methods We tracked laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, positivity rates, and vaccine uptake in 29,021 HCWs in Interior Health (IH) and 24,634 HCWs in Vancouver Coastal Health (VCH), by occupation, age, and home location, comparing to the general population in that region. We then evaluated the impact of infection rates as well as the mandate on vaccination uptake.
Results By October 27, 2021, the date that unvaccinated HCWs were prohibited from providing healthcare, only 1.6% in VCH yet 6.5% in IH remained unvaccinated. Rural workers in both areas had significantly higher unvaccinated rates compared with urban dwellers. Over 1,800 workers, comprising 6.4% of rural HCWs and 3.3% of urban HCWs, remained unvaccinated and set to be terminated from their employment. While the mandate prompted a significant increase in second doses, the impact on the unvaccinated was less clear.
Conclusions As rural areas often suffer from under-staffing, loss of HCWs could have serious impacts on healthcare provision as well as on the livelihoods of unvaccinated HCWs. Greater efforts are needed to understand how to better address the drivers of rural-related vaccine hesitancy as the pandemic continues.
Competing Interest Statement
AY, DT, DH, HH, JMG, AIO, SP, SS, CKS are all employees and/or contractors of VCH and/or IH.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) under grant M20‐00559 and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) under grant (VS1-175519), Protecting healthcare workers from COVID‐19: a comparative contextualized analysis.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval was obtained through UBC Behavioural Ethics Board (H21-01380).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding sources: This work was supported by The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) under grant M20-00559 and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) under grant (VS1-175519), “Protecting healthcare workers from COVID-19: a comparative contextualized analysis”.
Disclosures: AY, DT, DH, HH, JMG, AIO, SP, SS, CKS are all employees and/or contractors of VCH and/or IH.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
