Search

The COVID-19 global pandemic propelled important public health efforts to broaden the utilization of masks, protective eyewear, hand washing, and physical distancing to reduce viral spread. Shortly after, a massive [...], Introduction: Vaccinations for COVID-19 are being distributed, yet vaccine hesitance is placing many people at risk for infection, negative outcomes, and compromising public health. Given primary care clinics are where people most often interact with health care providers, understanding factors associated with this hesitance may help providers in integrated primary care settings best address this hesitance. Method: Between September and November of 2020, a survey was sent to all primary care patients within a large southern California health system, with over 10,000 responding (22% response rate). Survey items included sociodemographic variables, level of vaccine hesitance, "proximity to COVID" (e.g., direct exposure to COVID-19 and consequences), as well as a patient's primary source of health information (e.g., traditional news, social media, etc.). Responses assessed the strength of hesitance. Results: Results showed that while 78% of participants "strongly" believed vaccines generally are a good way to protect from illness, only 51% reported strong willingness to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Consistent with previous surveys, younger patients were more hesitant to get vaccinated, as were people of color. Unique to this survey was the finding that those relying on social media, faith-based organizations, or family/friends for health information had the greatest vaccine hesitance. Discussion: While our patient sample was less hesitant than other U.S. adult samples previously reported in the literature, our data suggest that targeting those patients who report reliance on nontraditional health information sources should be approached by primary care teams, including behavioral health providers, to address vaccine hesitancy. Keywords: COVID-19, vaccination, vaccine hesitancy, social media, survey

Background and Objectives Methods Results Discussion and Conclusions Scientific Significance Limited evidence guides the efficacy and safety of cannabis for therapeutic purposes (CTP). Healthcare providers lack requisite knowledge to advise and support patients. This study aimed to describe and compare several aspects of initial CTP interactions across different provider types.Adult cannabis consumers (N = 507) from the United States completed an anonymous online survey about their initial CTP interaction with their healthcare provider. Providers were categorized into four groups (Mental Health [MH], Family Medicine [FM], Medical Clinics [MC], and Other Specialty [OS]). Analyses compared several aspects of the interaction (e.g., risk mitigation, recommendations, satisfaction/confidence) across groups.Less than half of the sample reported discussion of cannabis risks (44.0%) or follow‐ups at subsequent visits (46.7%). Recommendations (where to obtain, consumption method, dose, frequency, and authorization) were uncommon (9.7%–25.2%). While the MH group reported the highest rates of risk mitigation behaviors, regression models adjusted for sociodemographic and cannabis characteristics were largely nonsignificant. For recommendations, the MC group was more likely than the MH group to report receiving all recommendations (p < .05). Younger age and greater cannabis‐related problems increased likelihood of risk mitigation and recommendations.CTP interactions focused on risk but generally lacked comprehensive recommendations that could potentially promote safe use. Data from provider perspectives could support the need for CTP guidelines and develop training for healthcare providers to promote safe CTP practices.For the first time, this study explored several aspects of CTP interactions and compared experiences across a variety of providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]