Outcomes of single dose COVID-19 vaccines: Eight month follow-up of a large cohort in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Two vaccines for COVID-19 have been approved and administered in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA); Pfizer-BioNtech BNT162b2 and AstraZeneca-Oxford AZD1222 vaccines. The purpose of this study was to describe the real-world data on the outcome of single dose of these COVID-19 vaccines in a large cohort in KSA and to analyse demographics and co-morbidities as risk factors for infection post one-dose vaccination. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, a total of 18,543 subjects received one dose of either of the vaccines at a vaccination centre in KSA, and were followed up for three to eight months. Data were collected from three sources; clinical data from medical records, adverse events (AEs) from a self-reporting system, and COVID-19 infection data from the national databases. The study was conducted during the pandemic restrictions on travel, mobility, and social interactions. RESULTS: The median age of participants was 33 years with an average body mass index of 27.3. The majority were males (60.1%). Results showed that 92.17% of the subjects had no COVID-19 infection post-vaccination as infection post-vaccination was documented for 1452 (7.83%). Diabetes mellitus 03), organ transplantation (p = 0.02), and obesity (p < 0.01) were associated with infection post-vaccination. Unlike vaccine type, being Saudi, male, or obese was associated with the occurrence breakthrough infections more than other parameters. AEs included injection site pain, fatigue, fever, myalgia, headache and was reported by 5.8% of the subjects. CONCLUSION: Single dose COVID-19 vaccines showed a protection rate of 92.17% up to eight months follow-up in this cohort. This rate in AZD1222 was higher than what have been previously reported in effectiveness studies and clinical trials. Obese, male, and Saudi were at higher risk of contracting the infection post-vaccination, Saudi and male might have more social interaction with the public when mobility and social interactions were limited during the pandemic. Side effects and AEs were within what has been reported in clinical trials.

Risk of COVID-19 in healthcare workers working in intensive care setting.

BACKGROUND: The higher risk of COVID-19 in health care workers (HCWs) is well-known. However, the risk within HCWs is not fully understood. The objective was to compare the COVID-19 risk in intensive care unit (ICU) vs non-ICU locations. METHODS: A prospective surveillance study was conducted among HCWs at a large tertiary care facility in Riyadh between March 1st to November 30th, 2020. HCWs included both clinical (provide direct patient care) and nonclinical positions (do not provide direct patient care). RESULTS: A total 1,594 HCWs with COVID-19 were included; 103 (6.5%) working in ICU and 1,491 (93.5%) working in non-ICU locations. Compared with non-ICU locations, ICU had more nurses (54.4% vs 22.1%, P < .001) and less support staff (2.9% vs 53.1%, P < .001). COVID-19 infection was similar in ICU and non-ICU locations (9.0% vs 9.8%, P = .374). However, it was significantly higher in ICU nurses (12.3% vs 6.5%, P < .001). Support staff had higher risk than other HCWs, irrespective of ICU working status (15.1% vs 7.2%, P < 0.001). The crude relative risk of COVID-19 in ICU vs non-ICU locations was 0.92, 95% confidence interval ( was 0.76-1.11 (P = .374). However, relative risk adjusted for professional category was significantly increased to 1.23, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.50 (P = .036). CONCLUSIONS: ICU had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 infection only after adjusting for the distribution and risk of different professional categories. The latter is probably determined by both exposure level and protection practices. The finding underscores the importance of strict implementation of preventive measures among all HCWs, including those performing nonclinical services.

Patients' Attendance to The Virtual Compared to The In-person Complimentary Outpatient Clinics at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Western Saudi Arabia: A Comparative Cross-sectional Study

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, outpatient clinics in National Guard-Health Affairs Hospitals, Saudi Arabia, have shifted their healthcare services towards virtual clinics to keep up with patient appointments while maintaining infection control precautions. This study aimed to determine if patient attendance compliance has changed by implementing virtual "phone call" appointments compared to the conventional physical appointments in outpatient clinics. Methods: This comparative cross-sectional study was conducted by comparing patients' demographic information, and compliance to virtual calls and physician recommendations during 2020 with the regular physical attendance clinics in 2019. Patient data was collected from the electronic medical records after randomly selecting the sample for each year from 6 main outpatient clinics. Results: During the 4-month period of 2020 (March-June), in which virtual clinics were implemented, there was a significant decrease in the attendance compliance when compared to the same period in 2019 conventional clinics. Data were analyzed for 404 and 407 patients' medical records from each year, respectively. The drop in the clinic attendance compliance was the highest in the pediatric oncology clinic. Moreover, physician orders of investigations and medications were significantly reduced. Conclusion: COVID-19 pandemic had a significant negative impact on patient care. Although that impact was seen greatest among those with chronic conditions and oncology patients, it was an essential step towards infection control during this difficult period. However, the pandemic is an opportunity to establish a comprehensive virtual care system that will ensure easy access and continuity of patient care. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Middle East Journal of Family Medicine is the property of Medi+WORLD International Pty. Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia: A case series.

Healthcare workers have been categorized among the priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination. However, post-vaccination infections have been identified. This study was conducted to investigate SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) who received the COVID-19 vaccine. A case series in a multicenter healthcare system in Saudi Arabia was created from HCWs who had (PCR-RT) confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection after at least one dose of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination. A total of 20 healthcare workers (HCWs) have been included. The majority (70.0%) were males and the average age was 39.4 ± 10.1 years. They included physicians (55.0%), nurses (25.0%) and other HCWs (20.0%). Eighteen (90%) HCWs had infection after the first dose; 47.1% within the first week, 41.2% within the second week, and 11.8% within the third week. Only two HCWs (10.0%) had infection one week after the second dose. The majority (63.2%) had mild (52.6%) or moderate (10.3%) disease with no severe disease or hospitalization. The majority of post-vaccination COVID-19 infections among HCWs occurred before the full protection of the vaccine is gained. Suspicion of COVID-19 infection should be considered even with a history of COVID-19 vaccination. Recently vaccinated HCWs should be advised to fully comply with all recommended precautions to prevent COVID-19 transmission.