Back

Strategies to Reach Employees Nurturing Guidance and Trust in Healthcare (STRENGTH): Understanding Employee Drivers for Employer-Based Influenza Vaccination Programs

Sanchez, A. P.; Isakari, K.; Keefe, M.; Isakari, M.; Sitapati, A.

2026-07-16 occupational and environmental health
10.64898/2026.07.13.26357995 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Vaccine hesitancy and logistical barriers continue to limit influenza vaccination uptake among healthcare personnel. The STRENGTH initiative evaluated employee drivers of influenza vaccine acceptance in healthcare workgroups with lower vaccination compliance. Methods: This mixed-methods program evaluation used a custom Epic electronic medical record dashboard to identify workgroups with lower influenza vaccination rates, followed by focus groups, targeted worksite vaccination clinics, and an anonymous survey. Survey data from 73 respondents were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney U tests, Kruskal-Wallis tests, chi-square or Fisher exact tests, and Spearman rank correlations. Results: Respondents had a mean age of 44.8 years (SD 11.3); 36 of 70 respondents reporting binary gender were male. Convenience of worksite vaccination received the highest importance ratings (mean 4.72/5), followed by protection from influenza (mean 4.38/5). Both were rated significantly above the neutral midpoint of 3 (Wilcoxon p<0.001). The strongest observed Spearman correlations were between peer pressure and leadership participation (rho=0.47) and between protection from influenza and willingness to receive a future combined influenza/COVID-19 vaccine (rho=0.42). Conclusions: Convenience and perceived protection were the most important vaccination drivers. Employer-sponsored workplace vaccination programs can reduce logistical barriers while providing opportunities for targeted education and trust-building. Keywords: influenza vaccination; healthcare workers; vaccine hesitancy; occupational health; workplace vaccination; employer-sponsored vaccination

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.7%
2
BMC Health Services Research
51 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
3
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.8%
4
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 2%
9.6%
5
Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
128 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
4.8%
7
Journal of Occupational Health
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
8
Archives of Public Health
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
9
Occupational and Environmental Medicine
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
10
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.2%
11
Vaccine
203 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.1%
12
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
13
American Journal of Infection Control
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
14
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
BMC Infectious Diseases
133 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Systematic Reviews
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
BMC Public Health
158 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
18
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
19
Preventive Medicine Reports
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
20
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 71%
1.0%
21
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Public Health in Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
23
eClinicalMedicine
77 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
The Lancet Regional Health - Europe
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
25
mBio
833 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.6%
26
BMC Research Notes
33 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
27
Cureus
68 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%