Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy is a major impediment to achieving herd immunity and overcoming the current pandemic. Our aim was to decrease the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy through an education intervention. Method An education intervention, consisting of a PowerPoint presentation addressing the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccine concerns/myths and a question and answer panel comprising health care providers from various specialties, was implemented to address vaccine hesitancy among personnel associated with Wright-Patterson Air Force Base through a series of virtual and in-person seminars. Participants completed a post-seminar survey as a retrospective self-assessment to identify attitudes and views surrounding vaccine hesitancy and the impact of the education intervention. Chi-squared test was used to examine relationships between categorical variables, and multiple logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for vaccine hesitancy pre- and post-seminar. All analyses were done using SPSS Statistics Version 25.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY). Institutional Review Board approval was not obtained before this study as it began as a non-research initiative and received non-research determination post hoc. Results Five hundred participants completed the survey. Mean age was 44.7 years with 13.4 and 86.6% medical and non-medical personnel, respectively. Nearly all (98.8%) had not received their first shot of the vaccine series. 402 (80.9%) were receptive to vaccination, and 95 (19.1%) were hesitant post-seminar. Of the 139 participants who reported they were initially hesitant after our intervention, 50 (36%) indicated that they were now receptive to the vaccine, while 89 (64%) remained hesitant. Of those 50, 48 (96%) had moderate to great amount of trust in COVID-19 vaccine information presented by physicians/other providers. Six respondents who wanted the vaccine before the intervention no longer wanted the vaccine. A medical occupation (OR = 4.85, 95% CI = 2.63-8.96, P < .001), little or no trust in COVID-19 vaccine information from physicians/other providers (OR = 19.48, 95% CI = 7.31-51.90, P < 0.001), and being age 30 or younger (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.02-3.2, P = 0.041) were independent predictors of vaccine hesitancy. Trust in providers was a significant factor in change of intent from vaccine hesitant to receptive post-intervention (OR 0.13, 95% CI = 0.03-0.59, P = .008). Age and occupation were not significant factors associated with change in intent. Conclusion Our education intervention was effective in reducing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in a military base population. Study limitations include applications toward other military and non-military populations, the possibility of nonresponse bias, and absence of prior validated interventions. Area for future studies includes improvement upon educational intervention, development of other effective methods, and application of intervention in other populations.

中文翻译：

---

教育干预对军事基地人群 COVID-19 疫苗犹豫的影响

背景 2019 年冠状病毒病 (COVID-19) 疫苗犹豫是实现群体免疫和克服当前大流行的主要障碍。我们的目标是通过教育干预减少疫苗犹豫的发生率。方法 实施教育干预，包括解决两个 mRNA COVID-19 疫苗问题/神话的 PowerPoint 演示文稿和一个由来自不同专业的医疗保健提供者组成的问答小组，以解决与赖特-帕特森空军相关人员对疫苗犹豫不决的问题通过一系列虚拟和面对面的研讨会为基础。参与者完成了研讨会后调查作为回顾性自我评估，以确定围绕疫苗犹豫和教育干预影响的态度和观点。卡方检验用于检查分类变量之间的关系，多元逻辑回归用于确定研讨会前后疫苗犹豫的风险因素。所有分析均使用 SPSS Statistics Version 25.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY) 完成。在这项研究之前没有获得机构审查委员会的批准，因为它是作为一项非研究计划开始的，并且事后收到了非研究决定。结果 五百名参与者完成了调查。平均年龄为 44.7 岁，医务人员和非医务人员分别占 13.4% 和 86.6%。几乎所有人 (98.8%) 都没有接种第一针疫苗系列。402 人 (80.9%) 接受疫苗接种，95 人 (19.1%) 在研讨会后犹豫不决。在 139 名报告他们最初在我们干预后犹豫不决的参与者中，50 人 (36%) 表示他们现在可以接受疫苗，而 89 人 (64%) 仍然犹豫不决。在这 50 人中，48 人 (96%) 对医生/其他提供者提供的 COVID-19 疫苗信息有中度到高度信任。六名在干预前想要疫苗的受访者不再想要疫苗。医疗职业（OR = 4.85，95% CI = 2.63-8.96，P <.001），很少或不信任医生/其他提供者提供的 COVID-19 疫苗信息（OR = 19.48，95% CI = 7.31-51.90 , P < 0.001) 和年龄在 30 岁或以下 (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.02-3.2, P = 0.041) 是疫苗犹豫的独立预测因子。对提供者的信任是干预后从犹豫接种疫苗到接受干预的意向变化的重要因素（OR 0.13，95% CI = 0.03-0.59，P = .008）。年龄和职业不是与意图变化相关的重要因素。结论 我们的教育干预可有效减少军事基地人群对 COVID-19 疫苗的犹豫。研究局限性包括对其他军事和非军事人群的应用、无反应偏差的可能性以及缺乏事先经过验证的干预措施。未来研究的领域包括改进教育干预、开发其他有效方法以及在其他人群中应用干预。并且缺乏事先经过验证的干预措施。未来研究的领域包括改进教育干预、开发其他有效方法以及在其他人群中应用干预。并且缺乏事先经过验证的干预措施。未来研究的领域包括改进教育干预、开发其他有效方法以及在其他人群中应用干预。