Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 11(4)2023 Feb 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2238533

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to the global Mpox outbreaks, this survey aimed to assess the knowledge, perceptions, and advocacy of Mpox vaccines among solid organ transplant healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among solid organ transplant HCWs in Saudi Arabia from 15 August to 5 September 2022. A total of 199 responses were received from participants primarily working in the kidney (54.8%) and liver (14.6%) transplant units. RESULTS: The survey found that most participants were aware of the 2022 Mpox outbreak, but the majority were more concerned about COVID-19 than Mpox. While the majority of participants thought laboratory personnel and HCWs in direct contact with Mpox patients should receive the vaccine, less than 60% believed that all HCWs should be vaccinated. Additionally, over half of the participants lacked knowledge of animal-human transmission of the virus. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the need for increased education on Mpox among transplant HCWs in Saudi Arabia, particularly regarding the virus's transmission dynamics and vaccines. This education is crucial to improve HCWs' understanding of this emerging disease, especially given their vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(12)2022 Dec 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2143808

ABSTRACT

Background: Monkeypox disease (MPOX) recently re-emerged in May 2022, causing international outbreaks in multiple non-endemic countries. This study demonstrates a novel comparison between the knowledge and perceptions of Saudi healthcare workers (HCWs) and the general public regarding MPOX. Methods: An online survey, conducted from 27 May to 5 June 2022, assessing participants' MPOX and monkeypox virus (MPV) knowledge in terms of transmission, vaccination, isolation precautions, and their attitudes toward seeking more information. Results: A total of 1546 members of the public and 1130 HCWs completed the survey. Briefly, 61.3% of the public and 74.2% of HCWs showed interest in seeking more information about MPOX. Both groups had average overall mean MPOX knowledge scores. Members of the public holding university degrees and those showing high levels of worry regarding MPOX had significantly higher knowledge scores. However, HCWs showed a poor vaccination knowledge score, while only 57% recognized that MPOX can present similarly to COVID-19 in the early stages. Female HCWs and those with high self-rated MPOX awareness had significantly high knowledge scores. HCWs in secondary and tertiary centers had significantly higher knowledge scores. Conclusion: Both groups showed a decent attitude in terms of seeking more MPOX knowledge, which correlated positively with their worry about and awareness of the disease. These observations are mostly as a consequence of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which encouraged the public and HCW to acquire more information about any novel emerging disease. Policymakers should make the most of this attitude in their awareness campaigns to prevent the spread of the disease and encourage vaccination in cases where it is needed. The knowledge gaps among HCWs were most evident in terms of clinical presentation and vaccinations; this problem needs addressing if we are to avoid further emerging MPOX cases.

3.
Front Pediatr ; 10: 944165, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2009892

ABSTRACT

Background: With the rapid surge of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, we aimed to assess parents' perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccines and the psychological antecedents of vaccinations during the first month of the Omicron spread. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey in Saudi Arabia was conducted (December 20, 2021-January 7, 2022). Convenience sampling was used to invite participants through several social media platforms, including WhatsApp, Twitter, and email lists. We utilized the validated 5C Scale, which evaluates five psychological factors influencing vaccination intention and behavior: confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility. Results: Of the 1,340 respondents, 61.3% received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, while 35% received an additional booster dose. Fify four percentage were unwilling to vaccinate their children aged 5-11, and 57.2% were unwilling to give the additional booster vaccine to children aged 12-18. Respondents had higher scores on the construct of collective responsibility, followed by calculation, confidence, complacency, and finally constraints. Confidence in vaccines was associated with willingness to vaccinate children and positively correlated with collective responsibility (p < 0.010). Complacency about COVID-19 was associated with unwillingness to vaccinate older children (12-18 years) and with increased constraints and calculation scores (p < 0.010). While increasing constraints scores did not correlate with decreased willingness to vaccinate children (p = 0.140), they did correlate negatively with confidence and collective responsibility (p < 0.010). Conclusions: The findings demonstrate the relationship between the five antecedents of vaccination, the importance of confidence in vaccines, and a sense of collective responsibility in parents' intention to vaccinate their children. Campaigns addressing constraints and collective responsibility could help influence the public's vaccination behavior.

4.
Front Public Health ; 10: 878159, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1785459

ABSTRACT

Background: As the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant spreads in several countries, healthcare workers' (HCWs) perceptions and worries regarding vaccine effectiveness and boosters warrant reassessment. Methods: An online questionnaire among HCWs in Saudi Arabia (KSA) was distributed from Dec 1st-6th 2021 to assess their perceptions, vaccine advocacy to the Omicron variant, and their perception of the effectiveness of infection prevention measures and vaccination to prevent its spread, their Omicron variant related worries in comparison to the other variants, and their agreement with mandatory vaccination in general for adults. Results: Among the 1,285 HCW participants, two-thirds were female, 49.8 % were nurses, 46.4% were physicians, and 50.0% worked in tertiary care hospitals. 66.9% considered vaccination to be the most effective way to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant and future variants. The respondents however perceived social distancing (78.0%), universal masking (77.8%), and avoiding unnecessary travel (71.4%) as slightly superior to vaccination to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants. HCWs aging 55 or older agreed significantly with vaccine ineffectiveness to control Omicron spread, while those who believed in non-pharmacological infection prevention measures agreed significantly with vaccination for that purpose. Male HCWs had a significant agreement with mandatory vaccination of all eligible adult populations. On the other hand, unwilling HCWs to receive the vaccine had strong disagreements with mandatory vaccination. Conclusions: The current study in the first week of Omicron showed that only two-thirds of HCWs felt that vaccination was the best option to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant, indicating the need for further motivation campaigns for vaccination and booster dose. HCWs had a strong belief in infection prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants that should be encouraged and augmented.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Perception , SARS-CoV-2 , World Health Organization
5.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(4)2022 02 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1700461

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant emerged and spread globally at an alarming speed, healthcare workers' (HCWs) uncertainties, worries, resilience, and coping strategies warranted assessment. The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe psychological impact on HCWs, including the development of Post-Traumatic Stress symptoms. Specific subgroups of HCWs, such as front-line and female workers, were more prone to poor mental health outcomes and difficulties facing stress. METHODS: The responses to an online questionnaire among HCWs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) were collected from 1 December 2021 to 6 December 2021, aiming to assess their uncertainties, worries, resilience, and coping strategies regarding the Omicron variant. Three validated instruments were used to achieve the study's goals: the Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS), the Standard Stress Scale (SSS), and the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS)-Short Form. RESULTS: The online survey was completed by 1285 HCWs. Females made up the majority of the participants (64%). A total of 1285 HCW's completed the online survey from all regions in KSA. Resilient coping scored by the BRCS was negatively and significantly correlated with stress as scored by the SSS (r = -0.313, p < 0.010). Moreover, intolerance of uncertainty scored by the IUS positively and significantly correlated with stress (r = 0.326, p < 0.010). Increased stress levels were linked to a considerable drop in resilient coping scores. Furthermore, being a Saudi HCW or a nurse was linked to a significant reduction in resilient coping ratings. Coping by following healthcare authorities' preventative instructions and using the WHO website as a source of information was linked to a considerable rise in resilient coping. CONCLUSIONS: The negative association between resilient coping and stress was clearly shown, as well as how underlying intolerance of uncertainty is linked to higher stress among HCWs quickly following the development of a new infectious threat. The study provides early insights into developing and promoting coping strategies for emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adaptation, Psychological , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Uncertainty , World Health Organization
6.
BMC Fam Pract ; 22(1): 247, 2021 12 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1582110

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide, and the vaccine remains the ultimate cornerstone to overcoming its long-term impact. Vaccine hesitancy might obstruct the effort to achieve herd immunity and eradicate the virus. We assessed Saudi Arabian individuals' willingness, beliefs, and barriers regarding the COVID-19 vaccine and their adherence to preventive measures during and after the pandemic. METHODS: A self-administered electronic validated questionnaire was distributed among the five major regions in Saudi Arabia between November and December 2020. The questionnaire addressed the sociodemographic data, beliefs, potential barriers, parents' acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination for their children, and adherence to protective measures during and after the pandemic. RESULTS: Of 8,056 participants, 4,218 (52.4%) of a non-representative sample were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Being a young adult, male, having less than a high school degree, being a smoker, having a chronic disease, and having a history of seasonal influenza vaccine uptake were positive predictors of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Hesitant participants reported concerns about vaccine side effects and safety as the main barriers to accepting the COVID-19 vaccine. Some refusers (26.1%) declared that they would reconsider vaccination only if the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine were reported by more studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed a promising willingness to accept the vaccine among the population, with positive beliefs and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination. However, a considerable proportion of the population was reluctant to accept the vaccine. Thus, publicly providing information about vaccine safety and implementing health education programs is crucial for increasing the public's confidence in the vaccine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia , Vaccination Hesitancy , Young Adult
7.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0244415, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1546844

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine perception, acceptance, confidence, hesitancy, and barriers among health care workers (HCWs). METHODS: An online national cross-sectional pilot-validated questionnaire was self-administered by HCWs in Saudi Arabia, which is a nation with MERS-CoV experience. The main outcome variable was HCWs' acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine candidates. The factors associated with vaccination acceptance were identified through a logistic regression analysis, and the level of anxiety was measured using a validated instrument to measure general anxiety levels. RESULTS: Out of the 1512 HCWs who completed the study questionnaire-of which 62.4% were women-70% were willing to receive COVID-19 vaccines. A logistic regression analysis revealed that male HCWs (ORa = 1.551, 95% CI: 1.122-2.144), HCWs who believe in vaccine safety (ORa = 2.151; 95% CI: 1.708-2.708), HCWs who believe that COVID vaccines are the most likely way to stop the pandemic (ORa = 1.539; 95% CI: 1.259-1.881), and HCWs who rely on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website for COVID 19 updates (ORa = 1.505, 95% CI: 1.125-2.013) were significantly associated with reporting a willingness to be vaccinated. However, HCWs who believed that the vaccines were rushed without evidence-informed testing were found to be 60% less inclined to accept COVID-19 vaccines (ORa = 0.394, 95% CI: 0.298-0.522). CONCLUSION: Most HCWs are willing to receive COVID-19 vaccines once they are available; the satisfactoriness of COVID-19 vaccination among HCWs is crucial because health professionals' knowledge and confidence toward vaccines are important determining factors for not only their own vaccine acceptance but also recommendation for such vaccines to their patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/psychology , Health Personnel/psychology , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus/immunology , Vaccination Hesitancy/psychology , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Saudi Arabia , Young Adult
8.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 9(12)2021 Nov 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1542479

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infection has a high mortality rate and continues to be a global threat, which warrants the identification of all mortality risk factors in critically ill patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study conducted in five hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). We enrolled patients with confirmed SARS-COV-2 infection admitted to any of the intensive care units from the five hospitals between March 2020 and July 2020, corresponding to the peak of recorded COVID-19 cases in the KSA. RESULTS: In total, 229 critically ill patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in the study. The presenting symptoms and signs of patients who died during hospitalization were not significantly different from those observed among patients who survived. The baseline comorbidities that were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality were diabetes (62% vs. 48% among patients who died and survived (p = 0.046)), underlying cardiac disease (38% vs. 19% (p = 0.001)), and underlying kidney disease (32% vs. 12% (p < 0.001)). CONCLUSION: In our cohort, the baseline comorbidities that were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality were diabetes, underlying cardiac disease, and underlying kidney disease. Additionally, the factors that independently influenced mortality among critically ill COVID-19 patients were high Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT )and international normalization ratio (INR), acidosis, and high ferritin.

9.
Saudi Med J ; 42(8): 853-861, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513262

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To study the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) after pandemic's peak and before the vaccine enrollment in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and further explore predictors for SARS-CoV-2 positivity. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 515 blood donors from November 22 to December 17, 2020 was conducted at King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia to look at SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) positivity. The participants were asked questions about their demographic characteristics, past SARS-CoV-2 infection, SARS-CoV-2-related symptoms and exposures. RESULTS: The seroprevalence in our study was 12.2% (n=63/515). Being a non-citizen was associated with significantly higher seroprevalence (OR 2.10, p=0.02). Participants with history of SARS-CoV-2 exposure or symptoms regardless of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis had higher SARS-CoV-2 IgG positivity compared to unexposed or asymptomatic participants (OR 2.47, p=0.0008 or 11.19, p=0.0001, respectively). Blood donors who had symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 IgG infection had a higher SARS-CoV-2 IgG positivity rate (OR 5.04, p=0.008) and index value (p=0.003) than the asymptomatic. Of all the reported symptoms, cough (p=0.004) and anosmia (p=0.002) were significant predictors of SARS-CoV-2 IgG. CONCLUSION: The seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among the blood donors in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia is considerably lower than the percentages necessary for herd immunity. Developing SARS-CoV-2-symptoms is the critical factor for higher seropositivity after SARS-CoV-2 exposure.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Antibodies, Viral , Blood Donors , COVID-19 Testing , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Risk Factors , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Seroepidemiologic Studies
10.
BMJ Open ; 11(6): e048586, 2021 06 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1280432

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the perception, confidence, hesitancy and acceptance rate of various COVID-19 vaccine types among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia, a nation with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus experience. DESIGN: National cross-sectional, pilot-validated questionnaire. SETTING: Online, self-administered questionnaire among HCWs. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2007 HCWs working in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia participated; 1512 (75.3%) participants completed the survey and were included in the analysis. INTERVENTION: Data were collected through an online survey sent to HCWs during 1-15 November 2020. The main outcome measure was HCW acceptance of COVID-19 candidate vaccines. The associated factors of vaccination acceptance were identified through a logistic regression analysis and via measurement of the level of anxiety, using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7 scale. RESULTS: Among the 1512 HCWs who were included, 62.4% were women, 70.3% were between 21 and 40 years of age, and the majority (62.2%) were from tertiary hospitals. In addition, 59.5% reported knowing about at least one vaccine; 24.4% of the participants were sure about their willingness to receive the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, and 20.9% were willing to receive the RNA BNT162b2 vaccine. However, 18.3% reported that they would refuse to receive the Ad5-vectored vaccine, and 17.9% would refuse the Gam-COVID-Vac vaccine. Factors that influenced the differential readiness of HCWs included their perceptions of the vaccine's efficiency in preventing the infection (33%), their personal preferences (29%) and the vaccine's manufacturing country (28.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Awareness by HCWs of the several COVID-19 candidate vaccines could improve their perceptions and acceptance of vaccination. Reliable sources on vaccine efficiency could improve vaccine uptake, so healthcare authorities should use reliable information to decrease vaccine hesitancy among frontline healthcare providers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adenoviridae , BNT162 Vaccine , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel , Humans , Male , Perception , RNA , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia , Surveys and Questionnaires
11.
J Epidemiol Glob Health ; 10(3): 214-221, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-781872

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) reported 170,639 cases and 1430 deaths from COVID-19 since the first case emerged in the country on March 2 through June 25, 2020. The objective of this report is to describe the characteristics and outcome observed among 99 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the largest academic hospital in KSA, and assess co-infection with the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV). METHODS: This single-center case series data included select epidemiological, clinical, radiological features and laboratory findings of all confirmed hospitalized cases of COVID-19 in King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC), Riyadh, KSA, from March 22 until May 31, 2020, followed through June 6, 2020. We conducted retrospective analysis of listed data from 99 hospitalized patients and present characteristics and factors associated with severity in percentages and univariate odds ratios. Cases were confirmed using nasopharyngeal or throat swab by real-time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and MERS-CoV by RT-PCR. RESULTS: The 99 hospitalized COVID-19 patients included in this analysis constitute 16% of 632 positive SARS-CoV-2 among 6633 persons who were tested at the KSUMC (positivity rate, 9.4%). MERS-CoV PCR was negative in all 99 patients tested. The majority of these 99 hospitalized patients were males (66%), had a mean age of 44 years (range, 19-87), and a quarter (25.3%) were health care workers. Patients with comorbid conditions accounted for 52.5% of patients including the 8.1% who were asymptomatic; diabetes mellitus being the most frequent (31.3%), followed by hypertension (22.2%). The most common presenting symptoms were fever (67.7%), cough (60.6%), dyspnea (43.4%), upper respiratory symptoms (27.3%), fatigue (26.3%), diarrhea (19.2%) and loss of smell (9.1%). The clinical conditions among these 99 patients included upper respiratory tract infection (47.5%), abnormal chest X-ray, lymphopenia, high inflammatory markers a fifth (21%) of patients had moderate pneumonia, while 7% had severe pneumonia with 22.2% requiring admission to the intensive care unit and 12.1% died. Late presentation with severe disease, an abnormal chest X-ray, lymphopenia, high inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein, ferritin, and procalcitonin), and end organ damage (high creatinine or high aspartate aminotransferase) were predictors for admission to critical care unit or died. CONCLUSION: We observed no MERS-CoV co-infection in this early cohort of hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were relatively young, more than half had comorbid conditions, presented with fever and/or cough, an abnormal chest X-ray, lymphopenia, and high inflammatory markers. Given MERS-CoV endemicity in the country, co-monitoring of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 coinfection is critical.


Subject(s)
Coinfection/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Endemic Diseases/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19 , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL