Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Inquiry ; 59: 469580221102202, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1883405


Background and Aim: Alternative treatments for respiratory disorders attempt to prevent or relieve symptoms and enhance functions. Furthermore, substantial evidence shows that several herbal medicines have been clinically effective against respiratory disorders. Thus this study assesses the Saudi students' use, beliefs, and practices related to herbal and dietary supplements for the possible prevention of respiratory infections. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was designed using Google Forms to collect the data from the healthcare and non-healthcare students currently pursuing their courses at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The data was collected over 4 months, from November 2021 to February 2022, using convenience sampling with a 25-item questionnaire. A statistical package for social sciences, SPSS 26, was used to analyze the data. Results: A total of 274 participants responded to the study. The mean age of the respondents was 21.9 ± 3.08 (mean (SD)). The prevalence of herbal medicine (HM) was found to be 62.7% (n = 172). Around 48.5% (n = 133) of the respondents occasionally used some form of HM during the period of an illness associated with a respiratory infection. About 66% of the respondents agreed that using HMs prevents or controls respiratory symptoms and strengthens immunity. A majority (75.2%) of the respondents agreed that ginger extract possesses antiviral and immunity-boosting properties, followed by garlic extract (59.5%), cinnamon (39.4%), and lemongrass (38.3%). In addition, between 37% and 45.6% of the respondents agreed that vitamin C and vitamin D intake helps in boosting immunity and reducing the likelihood of developing respiratory infections. The overall mean of the positive beliefs and practice score was 9.6 (range 0-14). The mean positive beliefs and practice scores were significantly higher for males (11.4 ± 3.2) compared to females (8.6 ± 3.6) (P < .001). The numbers were not significantly different regardless of the source of information (9.6 ± 3.5), respondents being in health colleges (8.9 ± 4.1) or non-health colleges (9.8 ± 3.7), them being previously or currently infected (9.7 ± 3.8), the absence of infection (9.7 ± 3.8), or the respondents possessing a history of chronic diseases (10.5 ± 3.9) or not (9.5 ± 3.7) (P > .05). Conclusions: This study found a relatively high prevalence of herbal and dietary supplements' use, positive beliefs, and practices to strengthen one's immunity against respiratory symptoms.

Dietary Supplements , Respiratory Tract Infections , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Prevalence , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(16)2021 Aug 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1341686


Stigma is a negative feeling affecting many patients with various health conditions, especially the contagious ones such as COVID-19. The Explanatory Model Interview Catalogue (EMIC) is one of the valid and reliable stigma-measuring tools; however, it has not been translated and validated in Arabic. Therefore, the aim of this study was to translate and validate the EMIC in Arabic among a sample of Arabic-speaking adults who recently recovered from COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. The 12 items of the EMIC scale were forward- and backward-translated and reviewed by all authors to check the face and content validity prior to approving the final version of the Arabic 12-item EMIC. A total of 174 participants aged ≥18 years who contracted COVID-19 and recovered as of 29 July 2020 were interviewed. The Cronbach's alpha of the Arabic version of the 12-item EMIC was 0.79, indicating an acceptable level of internal consistency. Using principal component analysis with varimax rotation, two factors explained more than 60% of the variance of the translated EMIC scale. The mean EMIC score was 5.91, implying a low level of stigma among participants. Married participants (ß = 2.93; 95%CI 0.88 to 4.98, p = 0.005) and those with a family history of mental illness (ß = 2.38; 95%CI 0.29 to 4.46, p = 0.025) were more likely to have higher EMIC scores in comparison to their counterparts who were unmarried and had no family history of mental illness. On the contrary, older adults were less likely to have high EMIC scores (ß = -0.11; 95%CI -0.21 to -0.01, p = 0.03). Future studies with larger samples of patients with COVID-19 and various health conditions should be conducted to examine the validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the EMIC among different patient populations and to unveil the factors that may play a role in patients' feelings of stigmatization in this part of the world.

COVID-19 , Social Stigma , Adult , Culture , Humans , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Saudi Arabia , Surveys and Questionnaires
J Multidiscip Healthc ; 14: 673-679, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1190231


BACKGROUND: The objective of this qualitative study was to explore the value of virtual IPE competition that involved a COVID-19 case among healthcare students and the lessons that can be learned to improve this experience in the future. METHODS: The 27 senior students from the colleges of medicine, pharmacy, nursing, and paramedics were invited to two focus groups that followed the IPE competition and lasted 60 minutes each. A semi-structured focus group discussion guide was used in the focus group discussion to explore the benefits and limitations of the virtual IPE experience. Verbatim transcription of the two video-recorded sessions was conducted, and inductive thematic analysis was performed to uncover different emerging themes. RESULTS: The number of students who consented to participate was 16 (59.26%). The IPE virtual competition was perceived favorably by all students; however, multiple organization and communication barriers were reported. Although the participants liked the IPE virtual competition, they clearly stated their preference for an in-person IPE competition over the virtual one. Managing a COVID-19 case was not perceived favorably by some participants due to the absence of evidence-based clinical guidelines supporting certain treatment protocols over others. Thus, some participants preferred a non-COVID-19 case where clear and evidence-based guidelines exist. CONCLUSION: The use of different IPE strategies to enhance healthcare students' collaboration and understanding of their roles in the multidisciplinary healthcare team, especially during pandemic times, such as COVID-19, is possible. Future studies should examine new and innovative IPE strategies that address the identified limitations of virtual IPE.