Barriers and facilitators of childhood COVID-19 vaccination among parents: A systematic review.

Background: The acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19 among parents of young children plays a significant role in controlling the current pandemic. A wide range of factors that influence vaccine hesitancy in adults has been reported worldwide, but less attention has been given to COVID-19 vaccination among children. Vaccine hesitancy is considered a major challenge in achieving herd immunity, and it is more challenging among parents as they remain deeply concerned about their child's health. In this context, a systematic review of the current literature is inevitable to assess vaccine hesitancy among parents of young children to ensure a successful ongoing vaccination program. Method: A systematic search of peer-reviewed English literature indexed in Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase, and Web of science was performed using developed keywords between 1 January 2020 and August 2022. This systematic review included only those studies that focused on parental concerns about COVID-19 vaccines in children up to 12 years without a diagnosis of COVID-19. Following PRISMA guidelines, a total of 108 studies were included. The quality appraisal of the study was performed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results: The results of 108 studies depict that vaccine hesitancy rates differed globally with a considerably large number of factors associated with it. The highest vaccine hesitancy rates among parents were reported in a study from the USA (86.1%) and two studies from Saudi Arabia (>85%) and Turkey (89.6%). Conversely, the lowest vaccine hesitancy rates ranging from 0.69 and 2% were found in two studies from South Africa and Switzerland, respectively. The largest study (n = 227,740) was conducted in Switzerland while the smallest sample size (n = 12) was represented by a study conducted in the USA. The most commonly reported barriers to childhood vaccination were mothers' lower education level (N = 46/108, 43%), followed by financial instability (N = 19/108, 18%), low confidence in new vaccines (N = 13/108, 12%), and unmonitored social media platforms (N = 5/108, 4.6%). These factors were significantly associated with vaccine refusal among parents. However, the potential facilitators for vaccine uptake among respondents who intended to have their children vaccinated include higher education level (N = 12/108, 11%), followed by information obtained through healthcare professionals (N = 9/108, 8.3%) and strong confidence in preventive measures taken by the government (N = 5/81, 4.6%). Conclusion: This review underscores that parents around the globe are hesitant to vaccinate their kids against COVID-19. The spectrum of factors associated with vaccine hesitancy and uptake varies across the globe. There is a dire need to address vaccine hesitancy concerns regarding the efficacy and safety of approved vaccines. Local context is inevitable to take into account while developing programs to reduce vaccine hesitancy. There is a dire need to devise strategies to address vaccine hesitancy among parents through the identification of attributing factors.

Efficacy of Tocilizumab in Management of COVID-19 Patients Admitted to Intensive Care Units: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background and Objectives: Mortality and illness due to COVID-19 have been linked to a condition known as cytokine release syndrome (CRS) that is characterized by excessive production of inflammatory cytokines, particularly interleukin-6 (IL-6). Tocilizumab (TCZ), a recent IL-6 antagonist, has been redeployed as adjunctive treatment for CRS remission in COVID-19 patients. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of Tocilizumab on patients' survival and the length of stay in hospitalized COVID-19 patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Methods: Between January 2021 and June 2021, a multicenter retrospective cohort study was carried out in six tertiary care hospitals in Egypt's governorate of Giza. Based on the use of TCZ during ICU stay, eligible patients were divided into two groups (control vs. TCZ). In-hospital mortality was the main outcome. Results: A total of 740 patient data records were included in the analysis, where 630 patients followed the routine COVID-19 protocol, while 110 patients received TCZ, need to different respiratory support after hospitalization, and inflammatory mediators such as C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) showed a statistically significant difference between the TCZ group and the control group. Regarding the primary outcome (discharged alive or death) and neither the secondary outcome (length of hospital stay), there is no statistically significant difference between patients treated with TCZ and the control group. Conclusions: Our cohort of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 did not assert a reduction in the risk of mortality or the length of stay (LOS) after TCZ administration.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Acceptance of Sinopharm and AstraZeneca's COVID-19 Vaccines among Egyptian Population: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the Egyptian population's preference and awareness related to available COVID-19 vaccines and to determine different factors that can affect beliefs concerning these vaccines. METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based study was carried out among the general population in Egypt. Data collection was conducted via an online questionnaire. RESULTS: About 426 subjects participated in the survey. Vaccine preference is nearly equally even (50%) among all respondents. There was no significant difference in vaccine preference according to age, gender, residence, educational level, or social status. About 50% of public respondents mentioned that both AstraZeneca and Sinopharm vaccines do not offer protection against new variant COVID-19 strains. Healthcare workers are the lowest respondents to agree that vaccines offer protection against new COVID-19 variants (10.9%) compared to unemployed respondents (20.3%) and other professions (68.8%) with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.005). Safety of vaccine administration among children below 18 showed statistical differences for gender and educational level predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the study population has satisfying knowledge about the COVID-19 vaccine. Continuous awareness campaigns must be carried out so that the people's background is updated with any new information that would help in raising the trust in vaccination.

Barriers and facilitators of childhood COVID-19 vaccination among parents: A systematic review

Background The acceptance of vaccination against COVID-19 among parents of young children plays a significant role in controlling the current pandemic. A wide range of factors that influence vaccine hesitancy in adults has been reported worldwide, but less attention has been given to COVID-19 vaccination among children. Vaccine hesitancy is considered a major challenge in achieving herd immunity, and it is more challenging among parents as they remain deeply concerned about their child's health. In this context, a systematic review of the current literature is inevitable to assess vaccine hesitancy among parents of young children to ensure a successful ongoing vaccination program. Method A systematic search of peer-reviewed English literature indexed in Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase, and Web of science was performed using developed keywords between 1 January 2020 and August 2022. This systematic review included only those studies that focused on parental concerns about COVID-19 vaccines in children up to 12 years without a diagnosis of COVID-19. Following PRISMA guidelines, a total of 108 studies were included. The quality appraisal of the study was performed by Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results The results of 108 studies depict that vaccine hesitancy rates differed globally with a considerably large number of factors associated with it. The highest vaccine hesitancy rates among parents were reported in a study from the USA (86.1%) and two studies from Saudi Arabia (>85%) and Turkey (89.6%). Conversely, the lowest vaccine hesitancy rates ranging from 0.69 and 2% were found in two studies from South Africa and Switzerland, respectively. The largest study (n = 227,740) was conducted in Switzerland while the smallest sample size (n = 12) was represented by a study conducted in the USA. The most commonly reported barriers to childhood vaccination were mothers' lower education level (N = 46/108, 43%), followed by financial instability (N = 19/108, 18%), low confidence in new vaccines (N = 13/108, 12%), and unmonitored social media platforms (N = 5/108, 4.6%). These factors were significantly associated with vaccine refusal among parents. However, the potential facilitators for vaccine uptake among respondents who intended to have their children vaccinated include higher education level (N = 12/108, 11%), followed by information obtained through healthcare professionals (N = 9/108, 8.3%) and strong confidence in preventive measures taken by the government (N = 5/81, 4.6%). Conclusion This review underscores that parents around the globe are hesitant to vaccinate their kids against COVID-19. The spectrum of factors associated with vaccine hesitancy and uptake varies across the globe. There is a dire need to address vaccine hesitancy concerns regarding the efficacy and safety of approved vaccines. Local context is inevitable to take into account while developing programs to reduce vaccine hesitancy. There is a dire need to devise strategies to address vaccine hesitancy among parents through the identification of attributing factors.

Surveillance of Side Effects after Two Doses of COVID-19 Vaccines among Patients with Comorbid Conditions: A Sub-Cohort Analysis from Saudi Arabia.

Background: Individuals with underlying chronic illnesses have demonstrated considerable hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccines. These concerns are primarily attributed to their concerns over the safety profile. Real-world data on the safety profile among COVID-19 vaccinees with comorbid conditions are scarce. This study aimed to ascertain the side-effects profile after two doses of COVID-19 vaccines among chronic-disease patients. Methodology: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among faculty members with comorbid conditions at a public educational institute in Saudi Arabia. A 20-item questionnaire recorded the demographics and side effects after the two doses of COVID-19 vaccines. The frequency of side effects was recorded following each dose of vaccine, and the association of the side-effects score with the demographics was ascertained through appropriate statistics. Results: A total of 204 patients with at least one comorbid condition were included in this study. A total of 24 side effects were reported after the first dose and 22 after second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. The incidence of at least one side effect was 88.7% and 95.1% after the first and second doses of the vaccine, respectively. The frequent side effects after the first dose were pain at the injection site (63.2%), fatigue (58.8%), fever (47.5%), muscle and joint pain (38.7%), and headache (36.3%). However, pain at the injection site (71.1%), muscle and joint pain (62.7%), headache (49.5%), fever (45.6%), and stress (33.3%) were frequent after the second dose. The average side-effects score was 4.41 ± 4.18 (median: 3, IQR: 1, 6) and 4.79 ± 3.54 (median 4, IQR: 2, 6) after the first and second dose, respectively. Female gender, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, comorbidity > 2, family history of COVID-19, and the AstraZeneca vaccine were significantly associated with higher side-effect scores. Only 35.8% of study participants were satisfied with the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. Conclusions: Our analysis showed a high proportion of transient and short-lived side effects of Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines among individuals with chronic illnesses. However, the side-effects profile was comparable with the safety reports of phase 3 clinical trials of these vaccines. The frequency of side effects was found to be associated with certain demographics, necessitating the need for further investigations to establish a causal relationship. The current study's findings will help instill confidence in the COVID-19 vaccines among people living with chronic conditions, overcome vaccine hesitancy, and increase vaccine coverage in this population.

Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of acute kidney injury among COVID-19 patients: A systematic review of systematic reviews.

The COVID-19 associated acute kidney injury (CAKI) has emerged as a potential intricacy during the management of patients. Navigating the rapidly growing body of scientific literature on CAKI is challenging, and ongoing critical appraisal of this complication is essential. This study aimed to summarize and critically appraise the systematic reviews (SRs) on CAKI to inform the healthcare providers about its prevalence, risk factors and outcomes. All the SRs were searched in major databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science) from inception date to December 2021. This study followed SR of SRs methodology, all the records were screened, extracted and subjected to quality assessment by assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR-2). The extracted data were qualitatively synthesized and tabulated. This review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022299444). Of 3,833 records identified; 42 SRs were included in this overview. The quality appraisal of the studies showed that 17 SRs were of low quality, while 8 moderate and 17 were of high-quality SRs. The incidence of CAKI ranged from 4.3% to 36.4% in overall COVID-19 patients, 36%-50% in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), and up to 53% in severe or critical illness. Old age, male gender, cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes mellitus and hypertension were frequently reported risk factors of CAKI. The need of renal replacement therapy (RRT) was up to 26.4% in overall COVID-19 patients, and 39% among those having CAKI. The occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was found independent predictor of death, where mortality rate among CAKI patients ranged from 50% to 93%. This overview of SRs underscores that CAKI occurs frequently among COVID-19 patients and associated with high mortality, need of RRT and adverse outcomes. However, the confidence of these results is moderate to low which warrants the need of more SRs having established methodological standards. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=299444], identifier [CRD42022299444].

Evaluation of Conspiracy Beliefs, Vaccine Hesitancy, and Willingness to Pay towards COVID-19 Vaccines in Six Countries from Asian and African Regions: A Large Multinational Analysis.

Vaccination protects people from serious illness and associated complications.Conspiracy theories and misinformation on vaccines have been rampant during the COVID-19 pandemic and are considered significant drivers of vaccine hesitancy. Since vaccine hesitancy can undermine efforts to immunize the population against COVID-19 and interferes with the vaccination rate, this study aimed to ascertain the COVID-19-vaccine-related conspiracy beliefs, vaccine hesitancy, views regarding vaccine mandates, and willingness to pay for vaccines among the general population. A web-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted (April-August 2021) among the adult population in six countries (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, India, Malaysia, Sudan, and Egypt). Participants were recruited using an exponential, non-discriminate snowball sampling method. A validated self-completed electronic questionnaire was used for the data collection. All the participants responded to questions on various domains of the study instrument, including conspiracy beliefs, vaccine hesitancy, and willingness to pay. The responses were scored according to predefined criteria and stratified into various groups. All data were entered and analyzed using SPSS version 22. A total of 2481 responses were included in the study (Pakistan 24.1%, Saudi Arabia 19.5%, India 11.6%, Malaysia 8.1%, Sudan 19.3%, and Egypt 17.3%). There was a preponderance of participants ≤40 years old (18-25 years: 55.8%, 26-40 years: 28.5%) and females (57.1%). The average score of the COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy belief scale (C19V-CBS) was 2.30 ± 2.12 (median 2; range 0-7). Our analysis showed that 30% of the respondents were found to achieve the ideal score of zero, indicating no conspiracy belief. The mean score of the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale (C19V-HS) was 25.93 ± 8.11 (range: 10-50). The majority (45.7%) had C19V-HA scores of 21-30 and nearly 28% achieved a score greater than 30, indicating a higher degree of hesitancy. There was a significant positive correlation between conspiracy beliefs and vaccine hesitancy (Spearman's rho = 0.547, p < 0.001). Half of the study population were against the vaccine mandate. Respondents in favor of governmental enforcement of COVID-19 vaccines had significantly (p < 0.001) lower scores on the C19V-CBS and C19V-HS scale. Nearly 52% reported that they would only take vaccine if it were free, and only 24% were willing to pay for COVID-19 vaccines. A high prevalence of conspiracy beliefs and vaccine hesitancy was observed in the targeted countries. Our findings highlight the dire need for aggressive measures to counter the conspiracy beliefs and factors underlying this vaccine hesitancy.

Estimation of Psychological Impairment and Coping Strategies during COVID-19 Pandemic among University Students in Saudi Arabia: A Large Regional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictive measures have substantially affected educational processes around the globe, resulting in psychological distress among students. The mental health of students in higher education is of paramount importance, and the COVID-19 pandemic has brought this vulnerable population into renewed focus. In this context, the evaluation of students' mental health at educational institutes has gained invaluable popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to ascertain the psychological health and coping strategies among students from a higher education institute in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: An online study instrument was used to assess anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, GAD-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, PHQ-9), post-traumatic stress disorder-PTSD (Impact of Event Scale-Revised, IES-R) and coping strategies (Brief-COPE). The severity of the psychological distress was classified as per the scoring criteria and correlated with demographics using appropriate statistical methods. RESULTS: Of 1074 students (age 21.1 ± 2.1 years), 12.9% and 9.7% had severe anxiety and depression, respectively. The mean anxiety and depression scores were 7.50 ± 5.51 and 9.31 ± 6.72, respectively. About one-third (32%) of students reported suicidal ideation, with 8.4% students having such thoughts nearly every day. The average PTSD score was 21.64 ± 17.63, where avoidance scored higher (8.10 ± 6.94) than intrusion and hyperarousal. There was no association of anxiety, depression and PTSD score with the demographics of the study participants. Religious/spiritual coping (5.43 ± 2.15) was the most adoptive coping mechanism, followed by acceptance (5.15 ± 2.10). Male students were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with active copings, instrumental support, planning, humor, acceptance and religious coping. Substance use was the least adopted coping strategy but practiced by a considerable number of students. CONCLUSIONS: The long-lasting pandemic situation, onerous protective measures and uncertainties in educational procedures have resulted in a high prevalence of psychological ailments among university students, as indicated in this study. These findings accentuate the urgent need for telepsychiatry and appropriate population-specific mental health services to assess the extent of psychological impairment and to leverage positive coping behaviors among students.

Evaluation of Impact of a Pharmacist-Led Educational Campaign on Disease Knowledge, Practices and Medication Adherence for Type-2 Diabetic Patients: A Prospective Pre- and Post-Analysis.

Type 2 Diabetes mellitus is a major public health concern with an alarming global growth rate. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Saudi Arabia ranks seventh in the world and second in the Middle East for the largest estimated burden of diabetic cases. Evidence shows that pharmacist-led care programs can be beneficial for the effective treatment of diabetes mellitus. Current study was aimed to evaluate the impact of Pharmacist-Based Diabetic Intervention (PDIM) for Type 2 Diabetes patients on knowledge of the disease, adherence to medications and self-care practices during the first wave of COVID-19. A multi-arm pre-post study was conducted among type 2 diabetic patients from April to October 2021 in Sakaka, Saudi Arabia. Patients were randomly divided into an intervention and a control group. The intervention group received the PDIM, whereas the control group only received the usual care. The pharmacist-based diabetes intervention model consisted of a diabetic educational module and medication improvement strategies. Furthermore, the intervention group also received specific telepharmacy services (calls, messages or emails) to address their medication-related problems, inquire about medication adherence and follow-up. At the end of six months, disease knowledge, self-care practices, and medication adherence score were analyzed. Furthermore, HbA1c and lipid profile were also compared. A total of 109 patients were included in the study. A significant difference was observed in the knowledge score between the intervention and control group (16.89 ± 2.01 versus 15.24 ± 2.03, p-value < 0.001). Similarly, self-care practices also improved in the intervention group as compared to the control group (4.39 ± 1.10 versus 3.16 ± 0.97, p-value < 0.001). Furthermore, the medication adherence and HbA1c significantly improved during between the group analysis (p < 0.05). Our study demonstrates that pharmacist-based diabetes intervention model is effective in improving patients' knowledge of diabetes, self-care practices, medication adherence and glycemic control.

Barriers and Facilitators of Pharmacoeconomic Studies: A Review of Evidence from the Middle Eastern Countries.

The world is facing a continuous increase in medical costs. Due to the surge in disease prevalence, medical science is becoming more sensitive to the economic impact of medications and drug therapies. This brings about the importance of pharmacoeconomics, which is concerned with the effective use of health resources to optimize the efficiency and costs of medications of treatment for the best outcomes. This review was conducted to find out the potential barriers and facilitators to implementing pharmacoeconomic studies in the Middle Eastern region having both high- and low-income countries. The varying economies in the region depict diverse healthcare systems where implementation of pharmacoeconomics faces a large number of challenges and is also aided by numerous facilitators that contribute to the growth of its implementation. In this context, we have reviewed the status of pharmacoeconomics in Middle Eastern countries in research databases (Google Scholar, MEDLINE, Science Direct and Scopus) using keywords ("pharmacoeconomics", "barriers", "facilitators", "Middle East"). The study reported that Yemen, Syria, Palestine, Iran, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon are the lowest-income countries in the Middle East and the implementation of pharmacoeconomics is the poorest in these states. The UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel are high-income rich states where economic aspects were comparatively better but still a large number of barriers hinder the way to its effective implementation. These include the absence of national governing bodies, the lack of data on the effectiveness of medications, the absence of sufficient pharmacoeconomic experts and the lack of awareness of the importance of pharmacoeconomics. The main facilitators were the availability of pharmacoeconomic guidelines, the encouragement of pharmacoeconomic experts and the promotion of group discussions and collaborations between researchers and policymakers. Cost-benefit analysis is still evolving in Middle Eastern countries, and there is a great need for improvement so that states can effectively benefit from cost analysis tools and utilize their health resources. In this regard, governments should develop national governing bodies to evaluate, implement pharmacoeconomics at the local and state levels and bring about innovation in the field through further research and development incorporating all sectors of pharmacy and pharmaceutics. The data presented in this research can further be extended in future studies to cover the various domains of pharmacoeconomics including cost-minimization analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-benefit analysis and their applications within the healthcare sectors of Middle Eastern countries.

Surveillance of Post-Vaccination Side Effects of COVID-19 Vaccines among Saudi Population: A Real-World Estimation of Safety Profile.

Vaccines are considered to be the most beneficial means for combating the COVID-19 pandemic. Although vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have demonstrated excellent safety profiles in clinical trials, real-world surveillance of post-vaccination side effects is an impetus. The study investigates the short-term side effects following the administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines in Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted among the general population with age ≥ 18 years, from five regions (Central, Northern, Eastern, Southern, and Western Regions) of Saudi Arabia for a period of 6 months (July to December 2021). A self-administered study instrument was used to record the side effects among the COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Of the total 398 participants (males: 59%), 56.3% received Pfizer and 43.7% were vaccinated with AstraZeneca. Only 22.6% of respondents received the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccines. The most commonly reported side effects were pain at the injection site (85.2%), fatigue (61.8%), bone or joint pain (54.0%), and fever (42.5%). The average side effects score was 3.4 ± 2.2. Females, young people, and Oxford-AstraZeneca recipients had a higher proportion of side effects. The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine recipients complained more about fever (p < 0.001), bone and joint pain (p < 0.001), fatigue (p < 0.001), loss of appetite (p = 0.001), headache (p = 0.008), and drowsiness (p = 0.003). The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccinees had more pain and swelling at the injection site (p = 0.001), and sexual disturbance (p = 0.019). The study participants also reported some rare symptoms (<10%) including heaviness, sleep disturbance, fainting, blurred vision, palpitations, osteomalacia, and inability to concentrate. This study revealed that both Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca administration was associated with mild to moderate, transient, short-lived side effects. These symptoms corroborate the results of phase 3 clinical trials of these vaccines. The results could be used to inform people about the likelihood of side effects based on their demographics and the type of vaccine administered. The study reported some rare symptoms that require further validation through more pharmacovigilance or qualitative studies.

SARS-CoV-2 Post Vaccinated Adverse Effects and Efficacy in the Egyptian Population.

Vaccines are the solution to overcome SARS-CoV-2. This study aimed to determine the post-Sinopharm vaccine safety-profile and immunity through antibody titers. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire from Egyptian participants who received two doses of Sinopharm vaccine. Data were divided into three parts, the first and second parts were to detect participants' post-first and second dose symptoms and practices, and the third for the results of IgG anti spike protein antibodies test and laboratory tests. Pain, redness, swelling at the injection site, headache, fatigue, and lethargy were the most common post-vaccine symptoms for both first and second doses. Most of the participants felt mild or no symptoms after vaccination. The symptoms started mostly during the first day post-vaccination and lasted for no more than two days. Forty-nine percent of the participants resulted in positive antibodies tests on day 18 post-vaccination. The average antibody level for vaccinated participants with past SARS-CoV-2 infection was much higher than that for non-past infected participants. These vaccines' administration methods need to be reevaluated by changing the dose, dose interval, adding a third dose, or mixing it with other vaccines with different techniques to improve their protection rates. Further studies are required to validate this finding.

Multilevel Engagements of Pharmacists During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Way Forward.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was first reported in China in December 2019 which was later declared to be a public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organization (WHO). This virus proved to be very contagious resulting in life-threatening respiratory intricacies posing overall public health and governance challenges. Amid the coronavirus pandemic and the unprecedented increase in healthcare demands, only inventive and adaptive practice among healthcare professionals is the need of the hour. Pharmacy services are an important mainstay in the public health and have considerable potential to combat the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Pharmacists working in several localities and health facilities are linked to patients either directly or indirectly. They can act swiftly in public health response such as drafting professional service guidance to pharmacists working in various healthcare facilities, ensuring effective medicine supply system, monitoring and resolving drug shortage issues, establishing and promoting remote pharmacy services, counseling the public on infection prevention basics, educating about proper use of personal protective equipment, discouraging self-medication, participating in clinical trials, small-scale manufacturing of sanitizers and disinfectants, busting the prevailing myths, and conducting drug evaluation and active surveillance. These interventions will help ease unprecedented burden on healthcare facilities during the ongoing pandemic and eventually will add value to patients and the healthcare system. The current manuscript accentuates the potential roles and activities that pharmacists can initiate in various healthcare facilities to help in relieving pressure on the overwhelmed healthcare system. The information and suggestions offered in this review could help in the restructuring of existing pharmacy services by governments, public health bodies, and policy makers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, this manuscript will underscore any unrealized potential among pharmacists working in various sectors including community, hospital, industry, and drug regulatory authorities.

Threat of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Pakistan: The Need for Measures to Neutralize Misleading Narratives.

Immediately after declaring COVID-19 as a pandemic, numerous wild conspiracy theories sprouted through social media. Pakistan is quite vulnerable to such conspiracy narratives and has experienced failures of polio vaccination programs because of such claims. Recently, two well-known political figures raised conspiracy theories against COVID-19 vaccines in Pakistan, stating that COVID-19 is a grand illusion and a conspiracy against Muslim countries. This theory is much discussed in the local community, supporting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. We urge healthcare authorities in Pakistan to take necessary measures against such claims before they penetrate to the general community. Anti-vaccine movements could undermine efforts to end the COVID-19 pandemic. We believe that ethical and responsible behavior of mass media, a careful advisory from the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, stern measures from healthcare authorities, effective maneuvers to increase public awareness on COVID-19, vigorous analysis of information by data or communications scientists, and publication of counter opinions from health professionals against such theories will go a long way in neutralizing such misleading claims. Because Pakistan is experiencing a large burden of disease, with a sharp rise in confirmed cases, immediate action is of paramount importance to eradicate any potential barriers to a future COVID-19 vaccination program.

Walkthrough Sanitization Gates for COVID-19: A Preventive Measure or Public Health Concern?

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to gain momentum around the world, several measures are being put in place to control its spread. One such effort includes the installation of walkthrough sanitization gates to disinfect passersby and prevent cross infection. However, there is lack of clinical evidence on the effectiveness of these walkthrough gates to contain COVID-19. Moreover, there are potential public health concerns associated with these walkthrough gates. Spraying individuals with disinfectant chemicals is strongly discouraged by various health authorities around the globe because of their propensity for eye and skin irritation, bronchospasm following inhalation, and gastrointestinal effects such as nausea and vomiting. This article underscores that the risks associated with the use of these walkthrough gates overweigh any potential benefits. Health authorities must discourage their use and should focus efforts on other preventive measures such as social distancing, wearing masks, and hand hygiene to prevent the spread of COVID-19 among the general public.