Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) in hospitals are at high risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare workers’ infection risk could be amplified during the ongoing pandemic due to various factors, including continuous exposure to patients and inadequate infection control training. Despite the risk healthcare workers face, vaccine hesitancy remains a global challenge. Differences in acceptance rates have ranged from less than 55% (in Russia) to nearly 90% (in China). In order to improve our knowledge of vaccine acceptance and its variation in rates, an evaluation is warranted. A survey was thus administered to healthcare workers. Methods: This survey aimed to address vaccination acceptance among employees in an urban level 1 trauma hospital. It was conducted through a developed and structured questionnaire that was randomly distributed online among the staff (age ≥18 years) to receive their feedback. Results: Among 285 participants (out of 995 employees), 69% were female, and 83.5% were overaged more than 30 years of age. The two largest groups were nurses (32%) and doctors (22%). The majority of respondents reported that they would “like to be vaccinated” (77.4%) and that they trusted the COVID-19 vaccine (62%). Moreover, 67.8% also reported that they felt the vaccination was effective. They reported that vaccination was a method to prevent the spread of COVID-19 (85.15%) and was a way to protect individuals with weak immune systems (78.2%). More importantly, the participants were concerned about other people (80.1%) and believed the vaccine would protect others. On the other hand, the result showed that the majority of participants (95.3%) chose to be vaccinated once everyone else was vaccinated, “I don’t need to get vaccinated”. Results showed that the majority of participants that chose “I don’t need to get vaccinated” did so after everyone else was vaccinated. Our results show that COVID-19 vaccination intention in a level 1 trauma hospital was associated with older age males who are more confident, and also share a collective responsibility, are less complacent, and have fewer constraints. Conclusion: Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine is relatively low among healthcare workers (HCWs). Differences in vaccine acceptance have been noted between different categories of HCWs and genders. Therefore, addressing barriers to vaccination acceptance among these HCWs is essential to avoid reluctance to receive the vaccination, but it will be challenging.

Background: Gamification is a promising approach to support rehabilitation, but implementing new devices after hand surgery (HS) faces challenges, especially in patient motivation and compliance. Technology-based, personalized solutions may encourage patients to perform gamified exercises consistently. This study investigated the impact of a tablet-based gamified hand-mobilization system on functional outcomes after HS compared to standard finger-expander training. Methods: Forty inpatients at BG Klinikum Duisburg were randomly assigned to a gamified or control group. Both groups underwent four weeks of stationary rehabilitation. Outcomes were assessed using the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), SF-36 health-related quality of life, and a visual analog scale (VAS) at pre- (T0) and post-training (T1). Tablet use frequency and duration were recorded. Results: DASH scores improved significantly over time (F(1.55, 58.85) = 16.36, p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.137) with no Group or Time × Group effects (p > 0.40), exceeding the MCID in both groups. SF-36 MCS, PCS, and VAS pain also improved over time (all p < 0.05) with no between-group differences (p > 0.40). Exercise duration differed (p = 0.007), but training frequency did not. Conclusions: Both gamified and conventional rehabilitation programs led to clinically meaningful improvements in hand function after hand surgery. No significant differences were observed between groups, indicating that the tablet-based system was feasible and well-accepted but not superior to standard training.