A Meta-Analysis on the Safety and Immunogenicity of Covid-19 Vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: The presented meta-analysis (MA) aims at identifying the vaccine safety and immunogenicity in published trials about SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. METHODS: All relevant publications were systematically searched and collected from different databases (Embase, Scopus, EBSCO, MEDLINE central/PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane Central Register for Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), Clinical Trials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), COVID Trial, COVID Inato, Web of Science, ProQuest Thesis, ProQuest Coronavirus Database, SAGE Thesis, Google Scholar, Research Square, and Medxriv) up to January 10, 2021. The pooled vaccine safety and immunogenicity following vaccination in phase 1 and 2 vaccine clinical trials, as well as their 95% confidence intervals (CI), were estimated using the random-effects model. RESULTS: The predefined inclusion criteria were met in 22 out of 8592 articles. The proportion of anti-severe acute respiratory distress coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibody responses after 7 days among 72 vaccinated persons included in 1 study was 81% (95% CI: 70-89), after 14 days among 888 vaccinated persons included in 6 studies was 80% (95% CI: 58-92), after 28 days among 1589 vaccinated persons included in 6 studies was 63% (95% CI: 59-67), after 42 days among 478 vaccinated persons included in 5 studies was 93% (95% CI: 80-98), and after 56 days among 432 vaccinated persons included in 2 studies was 93% (95% CI: 83-97). Meta regression explains more than 80% of this heterogeneity, where the main predictors were; the inactivated vaccine type (ß = 2.027, P = 0.0007), measurement of antibodies at week 1 (ß = -4.327, P < 0.0001) and at week 3 of the first dose (ß = -2.02, P = 0.0025). Furthermore, the pooled proportion adverse effects 7 days after vaccination was 0.01 (0.08-0.14) for fever, headache 0.23 (0.19-0.27), fatigue 0.10 (0.07-0.13), and 0.18 (0.14-0.23) for muscle pain. CONCLUSION: Immunogenicity following vaccination ranged from 63% to 93% depending on the time at which the antibody levels were measured.

Quality of life among health care workers in Arab countries 2 years after COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Assessment of the quality of life (QoL) among healthcare workers (HCWs) is vital for better healthcare and is an essential indicator for competent health service delivery. Since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic strike, the frontline position of HCWs subjected them to tremendous mental and psychological burden with a high risk of virus acquisition. Aim: This study evaluated the QoL and its influencing factors among HCWs residing in the Arab countries. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study using a self-administered online questionnaire based on the World Health Organization QoL-BREF instrument with additional questions related to COVID-19. The study was conducted in three different languages (Arabic, English, and French) across 19 Arab countries between February 22 and March 24, 2022. Results: A total of 3,170 HCWs were included in the survey. The majority were females (75.3%), aged 18-40 years (76.4%), urban residents (90.4%), married (54.5%), and were living in middle-income countries (72.0%). The mean scores of general health and general QoL were 3.7 ± 1.0 and 3.7 ± 0.9, respectively. Those who attained average physical, psychological, social, and environmental QoL were 40.8, 15.4, 26.2, and 22.3%, respectively. The income per capita and country income affected the mean scores of all QoL domains. Previous COVID-19 infection, having relatives who died of COVID-19, and being vaccinated against COVID-19 significantly affected the mean scores of different domains. Conclusion: A large proportion of the Arab HCWs evaluated in this study had an overall poor QoL. More attention should be directed to this vulnerable group to ensure their productivity and service provision.

Arabic validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the 5C scale for assessment of COVID-19 vaccines psychological antecedents

Background: In the Arab countries, there has not been yet a specific validated Arabic questionnaire that can assess the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine among the general population. This study, therefore, aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the 5C scale into the Arabic language. Methods: The 5C scale was translated into Arabic by two independent bilingual co-authors, and then translated back into English. After reconciling translation disparities, the final Arabic questionnaire was disseminated into four randomly selected Arabic countries (Egypt, Libya, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Saudi Arabia). Data from 350 Arabic speaking adults (aged >= 18 years) were included in the final analysis. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was determined by concurrent, convergent, discriminant, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Results: Age of participants ranged between 18 to 73 years;57.14% were females, 37.43% from Egypt, 36.86%, from UAE, 30% were healthcare workers, and 42.8% had the intention to get COVID-19 vaccines. The 5 sub-scales of the questionnaire met the criterion of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >= 0.7). The predictors of intention to get COVID-19 vaccines (concurrent validity) were young age and the 5C sub-scales. Convergent validity was identified by the significant inter-item and item-mean score of the sub-scale correlation (P < 0.001). Discriminant validity was reported as inter-factor correlation matrix (< 0.7). Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy measure was 0.80 and Bartlett's sphericity test was highly significant (P < 0.001). Exploratory factor analysis indicated that the 15 items of the questionnaire could be summarized into five factors. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the hypothesized five-factor model of the 15-item questionnaire was satisfied with adequate psychometric properties and fit with observed data (RMSEA = 0.060, GFI = 0.924, CFI = 0.957, TLI = 0.937, SRMR = 0.076 & NFI = 906). Conclusion: The Arabic version of the 5C scale is a valid and reliable tool to assess the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine among Arab population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Arabic validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the 5C scale for assessment of COVID-19 vaccines psychological antecedents.

BACKGROUND: In the Arab countries, there has not been yet a specific validated Arabic questionnaire that can assess the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine among the general population. This study, therefore, aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the 5C scale into the Arabic language. METHODS: The 5C scale was translated into Arabic by two independent bilingual co-authors, and then translated back into English. After reconciling translation disparities, the final Arabic questionnaire was disseminated into four randomly selected Arabic countries (Egypt, Libya, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Saudi Arabia). Data from 350 Arabic speaking adults (aged ≥18 years) were included in the final analysis. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was determined by concurrent, convergent, discriminant, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. RESULTS: Age of participants ranged between 18 to 73 years; 57.14% were females, 37.43% from Egypt, 36.86%, from UAE, 30% were healthcare workers, and 42.8% had the intention to get COVID-19 vaccines. The 5 sub-scales of the questionnaire met the criterion of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.7). The predictors of intention to get COVID-19 vaccines (concurrent validity) were young age and the 5C sub-scales. Convergent validity was identified by the significant inter-item and item-mean score of the sub-scale correlation (P<0.001). Discriminant validity was reported as inter-factor correlation matrix (<0.7). Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy measure was 0.80 and Bartlett's sphericity test was highly significant (P<0.001). Exploratory factor analysis indicated that the 15 items of the questionnaire could be summarized into five factors. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the hypothesized five-factor model of the 15-item questionnaire was satisfied with adequate psychometric properties and fit with observed data (RMSEA = 0.060, GFI = 0.924, CFI = 0.957, TLI = 0.937, SRMR = 0.076 & NFI = 906). CONCLUSION: The Arabic version of the 5C scale is a valid and reliable tool to assess the psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine among Arab population.

Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Frontline Healthcare Workers in Saudi Arabia.

This study assesses the determinants and severity of psychological distress among frontline Ministry of Health workers within Saudi Arabia during the rapid acceleration phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic. Moreover, we assess distress sustainability and stress-coping behaviors. We conducted an online national cross-sectional survey. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (k10) is a highly reliable instrument used to assess depression and anxiety. We evaluated stress-coping behavior and the persistence of the disorders. Binary logistic regression identified the sociodemographic factors related to severe distress. The prevalence of severe psychological distress among COVID-19 frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) was 27.3%. Factors associated with severe psychological distress in multiple regression analyses were male gender (p < 0.001), working for >45 hours/week (p = 0.009), age of >40 years (p = 0.038), years of experience for more than seven years (p = 0.048), Asir region (p = 0.003), and using psychological services (p < 0.001). The prevalence of severe psychological distress was 27.3%. Factors associated with severe psychological distress in multiple regression analyses were male gender, working >45 hours/week, age, years of experience, region, and using psychological services. The results form a foundation for targeted psychological health support services at the individual and institutional levels to prevent progression to mental illness.

Clinical and hematologic presentations of adults with COVID-19 patients in Jeddah: A case control study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The clinical features of COVID-19 were mentioned in previous studies. However, risk factors for COVID-19 are not fully recognized. The aim of this study is to characterize risk factors and clinical features of COVID-19 disease in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A retrospective, chart-review, case-control study was conducted at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Demographic, clinical, radiological, and laboratory data on patients diagnosed between March 18 and May 18, 2020 were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: We reviewed medical records on 297 suspected cases of COVID-19. Of these, 175 (59%) tested positive for COVID-19 by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and considered as cases, while 122 (41%) tested negative and considered as control. COVID-19 positive cases were more likely to be males, and non-health care providers. Hypertension (15%), diabetes (10%) and two or more concurrent comorbidities (54.4%) were more prevalent among COVID-19 patients. Patients presented with fever, cough, and loss of taste/smell were more likely to test positive for COVID-19 (P = 0.001, 0.008, 0.008; respectively). Radiological evidence of pneumonia was associated with confirmed COVID-19 disease (P = 0.001). Shortness of breath and gastrointestinal symptoms were not associated with the risk of COVID-19 at presentation. On admission, white blood cells, neutrophils, lymphocytes, eosinophils, basophils, and platelets were significantly lower among COVID-19 patients compared with controls. Surprisingly, D-Dimer levels were lower among COVID-19 positive patients when compared with controls. CONCLUSION: Male gender, hypertension, and diabetes are the most commonly observed risk factors associated with COVID-19 disease in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. COVID-19 patient had significantly lower lymphocyte and neutrophil counts.