Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 42
Filter
1.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(11): 1315-1320, 2022 Oct 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2069350

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Middle East respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (MERS-CoV) utilizes CD26 (dipeptidyl peptidase-4) and CD66e or CEACAM5 (carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule 5) receptors for cell infection. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) play a critical role in mounting adaptive immune response against the virus. This study was performed to assess the expression of CD26 and CD66e on PBMCs and their susceptibility to MERS-CoV infection. METHODS: Surface expression of CD26 and CD66e receptors on PBMCs from MERS-CoV patients (n = 20) and healthy controls (n = 20) was assessed by flow cytometry and the soluble forms were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). MERS-CoV UpE and Orf1a genes in PBMCs were detected by using Altona diagnostics reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) kit. RESULTS: Mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) of CD66e was significantly higher on CD4 + lymphocytes (462.4 ± 64.35 vs 325.1 ± 19.69; p < 0.05) and CD8 + lymphocytes (533.8 ± 55.32 vs 392.4 ± 37.73; p < 0.04) from patients with MERS-CoV infection compared to the normal controls. No difference in MFI for CD66e was observed on monocytes (381.8 ± 40.34 vs 266.8 ± 20.6; p = 0.3) between the patients and controls. Soluble form of CD66e among MERS-CoV patients was also higher than the normal controls (mean= 338.7 ± 58.75 vs 160.7 ± 29.49 ng/mL; p < 0.01). Surface expression of CD26 on PBMCs and its soluble form were no different between the groups. MERS-CoV was detected by RT-PCR in 16/20 (80%) patients from whole blood, among them 8 patients were tested in PBMCs, 4/8 (50%) patients were positive. CONCLUSION: Increased expression levels of CD66e (CEACAM5) may contribute to increased susceptibility of PBMCs to MERS-CoV infection and disease progression.

2.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 50: 102432, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2042162

ABSTRACT

In May 2022, several European countries including Spain reported cluster of monkeypox cases with no apparent travel to endemic areas. We report a suspected case of monkeypox in Saudi Arabia in a healthy 30-year-old man who returned from Spain and the Netherlands with fever and rash for six days duration during the same time period of the outbreak, he was suspected to have monkeypox but was ultimately diagnosed with chickenpox.


Subject(s)
Chickenpox , Exanthema , Monkeypox , Adult , Male , Humans , Monkeypox/diagnosis , Monkeypox/epidemiology , Exanthema/diagnosis , Chickenpox/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Travel
4.
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.

5.
Heliyon ; 8(9): e10525, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2007724

ABSTRACT

Background: Several risk factors have been used to predict severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) cycle threshold (Ct) values have not been included. Methods: A retrospective analysis of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients who were hospitalized between March 2 and September 1, 2020, in an academic hospital in Riyadh that serves as a Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) referral center was conducted. Nasopharyngeal (NP) and endotracheal (ET) samples were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR, and viral load (VL) was determined based on the Ct values of E genes. The Ct values were distributed into four groups, with group Ct1 (≤19) indicating the highest VL and Ct4 (≥31) indicating the lowest VL. Univariate logistic regression was used to analyze age, gender, and comorbidities in relation to Ct groups for a primary endpoint of either invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or mortality. Significant variables were further analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. Results: The analysis included 728 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (38% female; median age = 53 years; 41.3% diabetic; 39.4% hypertensive). Overall, 13.6% of these patients required IMV, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 15.5%. The IMV rate was higher in the Ct1 and Ct2 groups (15.2% and 15.5%, respectively) than in the Ct4 group (6.4%; p = 0.01). The mortality rate was also higher in the Ct1 and Ct2 groups (19.4% and 18.9%, respectively) than in the Ct4 group (8.9%; p = 0.02). The univariate analysis showed that lower Ct values and increasing age were associated with an increased risk of IMV (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.04; P < 0.0001) and mortality (OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.06; P < 0.0001). The multivariate analysis showed that Ct1 was associated with the highest risk of mortality (OR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.16, 5.52; P = 0.016), while Ct2 was associated with the highest risk of IMV (OR: 3.1; 95% CI: 1.47, 6.53; P = 0.003). Conclusion: The SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR Ct values of hospitalized COVID-19 patients can be used as predictors of IMV and mortality, and this effect increases when combined with age. Clinicians could use these predictors to triage older patients for risk stratification and allocate IMV.

6.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(9)2022 Aug 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2006251

ABSTRACT

Background: Monkeypox virus re-surged in May 2022 as a new potential global health threat, with outbreaks bursting in multiple countries across different continents. This study was conducted in Saudi Arabia during the first month following the WHO announcement of the Monkeypox outbreak, to assess healthcare workers (HCWs) perceptions of, worries concerning, and vaccine acceptance for, Monkeypox, in light of the resolving COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A national cross-sectional survey was conducted between 27 May and 10 June 2022, in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected on: HCWs' sociodemographic and job-related characteristics; COVID-19 infection status; and worries concerning Monkeypox, compared to COVID-19 and its sources; as well as their perceptions and awareness of, and advocacy for, supporting Monkeypox vaccination. Results: A total of 1130 HCWs completed the survey, of which 41.6% have already developed COVID-19. However, 56.5% were more concerned about COVID-19 compared to Monkeypox, while the rest were more worried about Monkeypox disease. The main cause for concern among 68.8% of the participants was the development of another worldwide pandemic, post-COVID-19, followed by their concern of either themselves or their families contracting the infection (49.6%). Most HCWs (60%) rated their level of self-awareness of Monkeypox disease as moderate to high. Males, and those who had previously developed COVID-19, were significantly less likely to worry about Monkeypox. The worry about Monkeypox developing into a pandemic, and the perception of Monkeypox being a severe disease, correlated significantly positively with the odds of high worry concerning the disease. The major predictors of participants' advocacy for vaccination against Monkeypox disease were: those who had developed COVID-19 previously; and those who supported tighter infection control measures (than those currently used) to combat the disease. A total of 74.2% of the surveyed HCWs perceived that they needed to read more about Monkeypox disease. Conclusions: Approximately half of the HCWs in this study were more concerned about Monkeypox disease than COVID-19, particularly regarding its possible progression into a new pandemic, during the first month following the WHO's Monkeypox international alert. In addition, the majority of participants were in favor of applying tighter infection prevention measures to combat the disease. The current study highlights areas requiring attention for healthcare administrators regarding HCWs' perceptions and preparedness for Monkeypox, especially in the event of a local or international pandemic.

7.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 49: 102426, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1984135

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Monkeypox re-emerged in May 2022 as another global health threat. This study assessed the public's perception, worries, and vaccine acceptance for Monkeypox and COVID-19 during the first month of WHO announcement. METHODS: A large-scale, cross-sectional survey was conducted between May 27 and June 5, 2022, in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, previous infection with COVID-19, worry levels regarding Monkeypox compared to COVID-19, awareness, and perceptions of Monkeypox, and vaccine acceptance. RESULTS: Among the 1546 participants, most respondents (62%) were more worried about COVID-19 than Monkeypox. Respondents aged 45 years and above and those with a university degree or higher had lower odds of agreement with Monkeypox vaccination (OR 0.871, p-value 0.006, OR 0.719, p-value <0.001), respectively. Respondents with moderate to a high level of self and family commitment to infection control precautionary measures and those who expressed self and family worry of Monkeypox infection had significantly higher odds of vaccination agreement (OR 1.089 p-value = 0.047, OR1.395 p-value = 0.003) respectively. On the other hand, respondents who previously developed COVID-19 were significantly more worried about the Monkeypox disease (1.30 times more, p-value = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Worry levels amongst the public are higher from COVID-19 than Monkeypox. Perception of Monkeypox as a dangerous and virulent disease, worry from contracting the disease, and high commitment to infection precautionary measures were predictors of agreement with Monkeypox vaccination. While advanced age and high education level are predictors of low agreement with vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Monkeypox , Smallpox Vaccine , Vaccines , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Monkeypox/epidemiology , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , World Health Organization
8.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(7): 773-780, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1895223

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Herd immunity for COVID-19 is the ultimate goal to end the pandemic. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has been a subject of considerable debate regarding vaccines effectiveness. This ongoing discussion and other evolving variables contribute to the hesitancy toward vaccines and levels of vaccination acceptance among both the healthcare workers and the public. This study was conducted to assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among the Saudi Arabian population during the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant. METHODS: A national cross-sectional survey conducted between June 28 and July 5, 2021. The survey collected sociodemographic information, personal and family history of previous COVID-19 infection, adherence to precautionary measures, COVID-19 vaccination status, parental willingness to vaccinate their teenage children, and address variable associated with hesitancy to receive vaccination. RESULTS: Among the 4071 participants, 67 % were women, 86 % of the participants received COVID-19 vaccine, 70 % had very high or high commitment with COVID-19 precautionary measures. On multivariate analysis, vaccine hesitancy was less likely in men (OR 0.652, p-value < 0.001), those who had direct family members infected with COVID-19 (OR 0.455, p-value < 0.001), and those who reported using the Ministry of Health official channels as information sources (OR 0.522, p-value < 0.001), while those younger than 44 years had higher hesitancy to receive the vaccine (1.5-2.1 times). Of the participants, only 42 % showed willingness to vaccinate their teenage (12-18 years old) children. CONCLUSIONS: The participants in this study had high COVID-19 vaccination rate; however, hesitancy was reported more commonly among women. Their willingness to vaccinate their teenage children was much lower. Participants relying on social media platforms were highly hesitant to receive vaccination. Public health officials should scale up their efforts targeting females, young population, and parents by vaccination awareness campaigns, and refute misinformation spread on social media, especially with the emergence of variants and the news burst that coincide with them.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia , Vaccination , Vaccination Hesitancy
9.
Infection ; 50(3): 583-596, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1872771

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccines have been developed to compact the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and have been administered to people all over the world. These vaccines have been quite effective in reducing the possibility of severe illness, hospitalization and death. However, the recent emergence of Variants of Concern specifically the delta variant, B.1.617.2, had resulted in additional waves of the pandemic. METHODS: We aim to review the literature to understand the transmission and disease severity, and determine the efficacy of the current COVID-19 vaccines. We searched Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase till August 4th 2021, and used the search terms "delta variant", "vaccinations"," breakthrough infections", and "neutralizing antibody". For the meta-analysis, 21 studies were screened in particular and five articles (148,071 cases) were included in the study, and only four were analyzed in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: In this review, both in vitro and in vivo studies showed significant reductions in neutralization rates against delta variants for vaccinated individuals and convalescent patients with prior history of COVID-19. However, There was a lower incidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 due to Delta variant was found after the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-AstraZeneca and Moderna vaccines. CONCLUSION: In fully vaccinated individuals, symptomatic infection with the delta variant was significantly reduced, and therefore, vaccinations play an important role to assist the fight against delta variant.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Vaccine Efficacy
10.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(5)2022 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1855847

ABSTRACT

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron spread fast globally and became the predominant variant in many countries. Resumption of public regular life activities, including in-person schooling, presented parents with new sources of worry. Thus, it is important to study parental worry about the Omicron variant, willingness to vaccinate their children, and knowledge about school-based COVID-19 precautionary measures. Methods: A national, cross-sectional, pilot-validated online questionnaire targeting parents in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was distributed between 31 December 2021, and 7 January 2022. The survey included sociodemographic, COVID-19 infection data, parental and children vaccination status, attitudes towards booster vaccine, parents' Omicron-related perceptions and worries, and attitude towards in-person schooling. Results: A total of 1340 participants completed the survey, most (65.3%) of whom were mothers. Of the parents, 96.3% either received two or three doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only 32.1% of the parents were willing to vaccinate their young children (5-11 years of age). In relation to their children 12-18 years of age, 48% had already had them vaccinated, 31% were planning to vaccinate them, and 42.8% were willing to administer a booster dose. Only 16% were more worried about the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. Residents of western KSA were more worried about Omicron compared to Delta. Parents worried about the Omicron variant and male participants were significantly less aware of school-based COVID-19 precautionary measures. Parents with post-graduate degrees and those having more children were significantly more inclined to send their children to school even if COVID-19 outbreaks could occur in schools, while parents who were more worried about the Omicron variant and were more committed to infection prevention measures were significantly less inclined to do so. Conclusions: Overall, parents had lower worry levels about the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. They had a higher willingness to vaccinate their older children compared to the younger ones. In addition, our cohort of parents showed high willingness to send their children to schools and trusted the school-based preventative measures. These findings can inform policy makers when considering school related decisions during the current or future public health crises.

11.
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
12.
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
13.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-322625

ABSTRACT

Background: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, structured medical training is challenging because the necessary travel for on-site interviews could increase the spread of the disease. Aim: This study was conducted to describe an urgently implemented, web-based interview process for selecting medical residents for the National Residency Matching in Saudi Arabia. Method: A cross-sectional, nationwide survey (appendix 1) was sent to 4,153 residency-nominated applicants in Saudi Arabia to the matching interview for 2020. Results: Among the 510 candidates who responded, 62.2% applied for medical specialties, 20.2% applied for surgical specialties, and 17.6% applied for critical care and emergency specialties. Most respondents (61.2%) never had video conferences. Besides, most respondents (80.2%) had used Zoom to conduct E-interviews, whereas only 15.9% used FaceTime. Among the respondents, 75.7% agreed that their questions regarding the residency programs were adequately answered during the virtual interviews. The top perceived factors that enhanced the experience were the free application, the clarification emails they received from the organizers, and the organizers’ effective communication. Conversely, what negatively impacted the interviews were the slow and interrupted Internet, the absence of clear instructions, and the lack of previous experience with teleconferencing. Conclusion: Videoconferencing was successfully implemented on an urgent basis during the COVID-19 pandemic in the medical residency application process in Saudi Arabia. The residency applicants preferred video interviews, along with the cost savings and easier logistics to conduct the interviews from various locations. Future studies to enhance this experience are warranted.

14.
J Infect Public Health ; 15(4): 389-394, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1683344

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prior to the availability of the current COVID-19 vaccine, the need to control the pandemic worldwide was focused on management of the disease using previously approved antivirals, including Favipiravir which inhibits viral replication through the RNA dependent RNA polymerase enzyme. Favipiravir's efficacy against different viral infections has made it a potential treatment for COVID-19. We are aiming in this study to assess the therapeutic efficacy and safety of Favipiravir in treating critically ill patients admitted with COVID-19 to Intensive Care Units (ICUs). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study was conducted in five tertiary hospitals in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The studied sample was randomized from a huge pool of data collected primarily for critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to (ICUs) during the period between April 2020 to March 2021. Two groups of patients matched 1: 1 for age and body mass index (BMI) was enrolled in the study; one group received Favipiravir and another comparison group received other antimicrobial medications, not including Favipiravir. RESULTS: A total data of 538 COVID-19 patients were analyzed, 269 (50.%) received Favipiravir and 269 (50%) the control group received different treatments. More than two-thirds 201 (74.7%) were Saudi citizens, the majority 177 (65.8%) were males and the mean age and (BMI) were; (57.23 ± 15.16) years and (31.61 ± 7.33) kg/m2 respectively. The most frequent symptoms of presentation were shortness of breath (SOB), fever, and cough, and the most frequent comorbidity was diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and ischemic heart disease. In the supplemental therapy, corticosteroid, tocilizumab and chloroquine were statistically significant (P = 0.001) when combined in the FVP group more than in the comparison group. Severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) was more frequent among Favipiravir group, while the overall mortality rate among the Favipiravir group was not statistically significant (p-value 0.4). CONCLUSION: According to the study's results revealing FVP is not superior to other antivirals, patients who received Favipiravir presented with more severe symptoms, more comorbidities, more complications, and is not effective in controlling the cytokine storm which negatively impact the efficacy of Favipiravir. FVP therapy had no influence on ICU and hospital length of stay in comparison with the control group as well as in the overall mortality rate among the FVP group was not statistically significant. further research is needed to understand how FVP along with other treatments can improve the length of stay among COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Amides , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/drug therapy , COVID-19 Vaccines , Critical Illness , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Pyrazines , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology
15.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(1)2022 Jan 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1614034

ABSTRACT

(1) Background: Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare neutrophilic dermatosis of unknown etiology. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines can cause a variety of adverse cutaneous manifestations. PG associated with mRNA vaccines has not previously been described. This case study reports on the first patient to develop PG after receiving BNT162b2. (2) Case Presentation: An otherwise-healthy 27-year-old man developed multiple skin lesions 24 h after receiving the first dose of the messenger RNA-based Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine. When in hospital, he developed a new painful ulcerative lesion on his right hand. Skin ulcer edge biopsy showed severe epidermal neutrophilic infiltrate with epidermal and dermal edema, underlying superficial dermal necrosis, and characteristic undermining with extensive mixed inflammatory infiltration of the dermis and abscess formation consistent with an ulcer with mixed dermal inflammation compatible with pyoderma gangrenosum. The lesion showed rapid improvement after the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy. (3) Conclusions: PG may be a rare adverse event related to the BNT162b2 vaccine, which could be more frequently encountered with the wide-scale use of mRNA vaccines. The continuous monitoring and surveillance of skin manifestations post-vaccination is essential.

16.
Healthcare (Basel) ; 10(1)2021 Dec 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613729

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, conducting face-to-face medical residency interviews was challenging due to infection prevention precautions, social distancing, and travel restrictions. Virtual interviews were implemented by the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) as an alternative process for residency matching while striving to maintain the same quality standards. This national survey was conducted to assess the satisfaction and perceptions of faculty members' virtual interview performance in the assessment for the medical training residency programs. Among the participating 173 faculty members, 34.1% did not have previous experience with video-conferencing. The Zoom application was the most commonly used platform (65.9%). Most (89.6%) of the faculty perceived virtual interviews as "adequate" platforms on which the candidates could express themselves, while almost half of the faculty (53.8%) agreed that virtual interviews allowed them to accurately reach an impression about the candidates. Overall, 73.4% of faculty felt comfortable ranking the virtually interviewed candidates. We conclude that the acceptance of participating faculty members in the first Saudi medical residency training matching cycle virtual interviewing event was well-perceived. This study provides evidence for future application and research of virtual interviews in residency candidates' assessment, especially after the pandemic crisis resolves.

17.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-296512

ABSTRACT

During the COVID-19 pandemic, conducting face-to-face medical residency interviews was challenging due to infection prevention precautions, social distancing and travel restrictions. Virtual interviews were implemented by the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) as an alternative process for residency matching while striving to maintain the same quality standards. This national survey was conducted to assess the satisfaction and perceptions of faculty members’virtual interviews performance in the assessment for the medical training residency programs. Among the participating 173 faculty members (34.1%) did not have previous experience with video-conferencing. Zoom application was the most commonly used platform (65.9%). Most (89.6%) of the faculty perceived virtual interviews as “adequate”for the candidates to express themselves, while almost half of the faculty (53.8%) agreed that virtual interviews allowed them to accurately reach an impression about the candidates. Overall, 73.4% of faculty felt comfortable ranking the virtually interviewed candidates. We conclude that the acceptance of participating faculty members in the first Saudi medical residency training matching cycle virtual interviewing event was well perceived. This study provides evidence for future application and research of virtual interviews in residency candidates' assessment, especially after the pandemic crisis resolves.

18.
Vaccine ; 40(3): 477-482, 2022 01 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1569120

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute adverse events and anaphylaxis were reported after the administration of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines. We aim to explore the nature and outcome of adverse events following BNT162B2 vaccine in a community vaccination center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. METHOD: Within 30 min post vaccination, all acute adverse events (AAEs) that occurred before March 31st, 2021, and in people older than 16 years were reviewed (AAE group). We used the case definition of Brighton collaboration on vaccine safety to define anaphylaxis. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, allergy history, and outcome at disposition were collected. Observation duration after vaccination was short (<15 min) or extended (<3 h). Statistical analysis was performed to study AAEs association with the study variables and outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 71,221 vaccine recipients, 144 (0.002%) had developed 345 AAEs, at a rate of 48.4 events per 10,000 dose administered. The majority of cases in AAE group were first dose recipients (93.8%) and previously healthy (59%), while the minority had a previous history of allergy (6.3%) or a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (4.2%). We found a significant association between female gender and the occurrence of any AAE (p-value = 0.002). Per every 10,000 doses administered, non-anaphylactic AAEs were dizziness (17.8), headache (9.7), nausea (7.1), or syncope (3.2). Only one in every ten AAEs was considered serious and resulted in an extended observation (4.8 per 10,000 doses), but only 1/144 required hospitalization for non-anaphylaxis reasons (0.1 per 10,000 doses). According to the Brighton collaboration definition of anaphylaxis, no single case of high certainty anaphylaxis was recorded. No death was documented in this cohort. CONCLUSION: Acute adverse events due toBNT162b2 vaccinewere rare andmostlynon-seriouswith a tendency to occur more in women. Further prospectivestudieson largervaccine recipientsto evaluatethe incidenceof anaphylaxis in the Saudi population are warranted.


Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , COVID-19 , Anaphylaxis/chemically induced , Anaphylaxis/epidemiology , Female , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology
19.
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 , /psychology , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Saudi Arabia , Young Adult
20.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-292554

ABSTRACT

Privacy of personal information is a protected human right both under the international human rights and national laws, statutes and regulations, subject to so exceptions that include protecting public health. The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged and overwhelmed the status quo in every human sphere, including the conventional surveillance of infectious diseases, contact tracing, isolation, reporting and vaccination while simultaneously protecting the privacy of personal data. <br><br>The pandemic had led national governments, institutions and agencies to adopt mobile applications for collecting, analysing, managing and sharing critical personal data of individuals infected with or exposed to COVID-19. These data may be centralized at a central database, or localized in individuals’ phones. While the benefits of sharing private information for achieving public health needs may not be disputed, the risk of breach of personal privacy is, also, enormous. <br><br>Consequently, it forced the national governments into a dilemma of either succumbing to public health needs, or strictly respecting and protecting the privacy of individuals, or balancing the two conflicting demands. There is a massive body of literature on the security and privacy of such mobile applications, but none has adequately explored and discussed the public interest justifications under the Saudi Arabian laws for the alleged privacy breaches. <br><br>This paper explored the COVID-19 surveillance mobile app technologies in use in Saudi Arabia for their potential risks of data breaches under the prevailing data protection laws and regulations with a view to understanding if such breaches are obligated, allowed, or justified under the laws. Our findings suggest that any potential risk of a breach to the individuals’ privacy of personal information under the law would seem to have been properly balanced against (justified by) the public health needs to protect the society during the COVID-19 pandemic. <br>

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL