Background: Immunizations for emergency medical services (EMS) professionals during pandemics are an important tool to increase the safety of the workforce as well as their patients. The purpose of this study was to better understand EMS professionals’ decisions to receive or decline a COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of nationally certified EMS professionals (18–85 years) in April 2021. Participants received an electronic survey asking whether they received a vaccine, why or why not, and their associated beliefs using three validated scales: perceived risk of COVID-19, medical mistrust, and confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine. Data were merged with National Registry dataset demographics. Analyses included descriptive analysis and multivariable logistic regression (OR, 95% CI). Multivariate imputation by chained equations was used for missingness. Results: A total of 2,584 respondents satisfied inclusion criteria (response rate = 14%). Overall, 70% of EMS professionals were vaccinated. Common reasons for vaccination among vaccinated respondents were to protect oneself (76%) and others (73%). Common reasons for non-vaccination among non-vaccinated respondents included concerns about vaccine safety (53%) and beliefs that vaccination was not necessary (39%). Most who had not received the vaccine did not plan to get it in the future (84%). Hesitation was most frequently related to wanting to see how the vaccine was working for others (55%). Odds of COVID-19 vaccination were associated with demographics including age (referent 51 years: 2.22, 1.64–3.01), male sex (1.26, 1.01–1.58), residing in an urban/suburban area (referent rural; 1.36, 1.08–1.70), advanced education (referent GED/high school and below; bachelor’s and above: 1.72, 1.19–2.47), and working at a hospital (referent fire-based agency; 1.53, 1.04–2.24). Additionally, vaccination odds were significantly higher with greater perceived risk of COVID-19 (2.05, 1.68–2.50), and higher vaccine confidence (2.84, 2.40–3.36). Odds of vaccination were significantly lower with higher medical mistrust (0.54, 0.46–0.63). Conclusion: Despite vaccine availability, not all EMS professionals had been vaccinated. The decision to receive a COVID-19 vaccine was associated with demographics, beliefs regarding COVID-19 and the vaccine, and medical mistrust. Efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates should emphasize the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

The International Physical Activity Questionnaire – Short Form (IPAQ-SF) is a globally-used self-report measure of physical activity (PA). Validity evidence exists; none has evaluated the IPAQ-SF with reduced recall time. This study evaluates absolute and relative agreement for PA at all intensities, and relative to recommended guideline classification through: (1) a daily, online-delivered adapted IPAQ-SF and (2) accelerometer (a) with a 10-minute bout minimum (TMBM) and (b) without (NBM). Fifty-five participants (mean 28.3 years, 61.8% females) wore an accelerometer and completed the IPAQ-SF for 7 consecutive days. IPAQ-SF and NBM correlations were acceptable (total PA 0.45, moderate-to-vigorous PA 0.38). IPAQ-SF underestimated NBM values. IPAQ-SF sensitivity compared to NBM guideline classification was 70%; specificity was 100%. Correlations with TMBM were weaker for all intensities. IPAQ-SF overestimated TMBM values. IPAQ-SF sensitivity compared to TMBM guideline classification was 77%; specificity was 55%. The adapted IPAQ-SF showed acceptable validity evidence for relative PA measurement.

Although COVID-19 vaccines are widely available in the U.S. and much of the world, many have chosen to forgo this vaccination. Emergency medical services (EMS) professionals, despite their role on the frontlines and interactions with COVID-positive patients, are not immune to vaccine hesitancy. Via a survey conducted in April 2021, we investigated the extent to which first responders in the U.S. trusted various information sources to provide reliable information about COVID-19 vaccines. Those vaccinated generally trusted healthcare providers as a source of information, but unvaccinated first responders had fairly low trust in this information source—a group to which they, themselves, belong. Additionally, regardless of vaccination status, trust in all levels of government, employers, and their community as sources of information was low. Free-response explanations provided some context to these findings, such as preference for other COVID-19 management options, including drugs proven ineffective. A trusted source of COVID-19 vaccination information is not readily apparent. Individuals expressed a strong desire for the autonomy to make vaccination decisions for themselves, as opposed to mandates. Potential reasons for low trust, possible solutions to address them, generalizability to the broader public, and implications of low trust in official institutions are discussed.

Many United States (U.S.) communities face challenges with Emergency Medical Services (EMS) workforce turnover. The demands created by the pandemic have worsened the stressors EMS clinicians face, possibly changing the drivers of workforce turnover. Our study aims to understand the factors associated with Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) and paramedics' likelihood of leaving EMS. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of nationally registered civilian EMTs and paramedics ages 18-85 from October 2021 to April 2022. After recertifying their National EMS certification, respondents were invited to complete a survey regarding their primary role, additional jobs, and the likelihood of leaving EMS in the next 12 months. If likely to leave, reasons for leaving were collected and evaluated for the top reasons. Multivariable logistic regression modeling (OR, 95% CI) was used to describe the odds of being likely to leave in 12 months, adjusted for age, agency type, education level, primary role, and job satisfaction. A total of 29,671 (response rate-25.9%) EMTs and paramedics were included in the analysis, with 7.1% and 7.9%, respectively, reporting they were likely to leave EMS in 12 months. The EMTs likely to leave were younger (median age 32 vs. 37) and had fewer years with main EMS job (median 3 vs. 4) than paramedics. A lower proportion of EMTs were male (68.8% vs. 78.6%) and non-Hispanic White (79.8% vs. 87.6%). The EMTs were less likely full-time (65.6% vs. 87.5%) and held fewer EMS jobs (23.4% vs. 32.3%). The EMTs and paramedics reported stress as the most significant reason for leaving (27.9% and 38.8%, respectively), followed by COVID-19 (12.9% and 19.3%) and education (18.3% and 6.4%). Those dissatisfied had significantly higher odds of leaving (11.91 and 13.46, respectively). The EMTs and paramedics in hospitals (OR = 2.32, OR = 2.37), private (OR = 2.72, OR = 2.38), and government non-fire (OR = 2.22, OR = 1.98) agencies were likelier to leave than fire agencies. Although increased stress and pandemic-related factors are most common reasons reported for being likely to leave EMS, job dissatisfaction was the most impactful factor. A better understanding of factors that drive job satisfaction needs evaluation to develop strategies to enhance retention.

Reasons for COVID-19 hesitancy are multi-faceted and tend to differ from those for general vaccine hesitancy. We developed the COVID-19 Vaccine Concerns Scale (CVCS), a self-report measure intended to better understand individuals’ concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. We validated the scale using data from a convenience sample of 2,281 emergency medical services providers, a group of professionals with high occupational COVID-19 risk. Measures included the CVCS items, an adapted Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale, a general vaccine hesitancy scale, demographics, and self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status. The CVCS had high internal consistency reliability (α = .89). A one-factor structure was determined by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA), resulting in a seven-item scale. The model had good fit (X2[14] = 189.26, p < .001; CFI = .95, RMSEA = .11 [.09, .12], NNFI = .93, SRMR = .03). Moderate Pearson correlations with validated scales of general vaccine hesitancy (r = .71 , p < .001; n = 2144) and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (r = .82; p < .001; n = 2279) indicated construct validity. The CVCS predicted COVID-19 vaccination status (B = −2.21, Exp(B) = .11 [95% CI = .09, .13], Nagelkerke R² = .55), indicating criterion-related validity. In sum, the 7-item CVCS is a reliable and valid self-report measure to examine fears and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. The scale predicts COVID-19 vaccination status and can be used to inform efforts to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Objective. Emergency medical services (EMS) play a key role in access to prehospital emergency care. While EMS has defined levels of certification, the roles in the care paradigm fulfilled by these clinicians vary. The aim of this study is to describe the national differences between EMS clinicians with primary non-patient care vs. patient care roles. Methods. We performed a cross sectional evaluation of nationally certified EMS clinicians in the United States who recertified in 2020. As part of the recertification process, applicants voluntarily complete profile questions regarding demographic, job, and service characteristics. We compared the characteristics between individuals self-reporting primary patient care roles vs. non-patient care roles. Using logistic regression, we determined independent predictors for having a non-patient care role. Results. In 2020, 126,038 persons completed recertification. Of the 96,661 completing the profile, 80,591 (83.4%) indicated that they provided patient care, and 16,070 (16.6%) did not provide patient care as a primary role. Non-patient care personnel were more likely to be older (median 43 years old vs 34 years old), and to have a higher level of education (bachelor’s degree or more: OR 2.25, 95%CI [2.13-2.38]) compared with patient care practitioners. Non-patient care personnel were less likely to be female (0.67 [0.64-0.70]) and minorities (OR 0.80 [0.76-0.84]). Non-patient care personnel reported longer work experience (16 years or more: OR 6.30 [5.98-6.64]), were less likely to hold part time positions (OR 0.62 [0.59-0.65]), and were less often attached to more than one agency (OR 0.83 [0.79-0.86]). Non-patient care personnel were less likely to work in rural settings (OR 0.81 [0.78-0.85]). Conclusions. EMS clinicians in non-patient care roles account for 17% of the study population. The odds of performing as a non-patient care practitioner are associated with characteristics related to demographics and workforce experience. Future work will be necessary to identify mechanisms to encourage diversity within the patient care and non-patient care workforces.