COVID-19 and severity of liver diseases: Possible crosstalk and clinical implications.

COVID-19-infected individuals and those who recovered from the infection have been demonstrated to have elevated liver enzymes or abnormal liver biochemistries, particularly with preexisting liver diseases, liver metabolic disorders, viral hepatitis, and other hepatic comorbidities. However, possible crosstalk and intricate interplay between COVID-19 and liver disease severity are still elusive, and the available data are murky and confined. Similarly, the syndemic of other blood-borne infectious diseases, chemical-induced liver injuries, and chronic hepatic diseases continued to take lives while showing signs of worsening due to the COVID-19 crisis. Moreover, the pandemic is not over yet and is transitioning to becoming an epidemic in recent years; hence, monitoring liver function tests (LFTs) and assessing hepatic consequences of COVID-19 in patients with or without liver illnesses would be of paramount interest. This pragmatic review explores the correlations between COVID-19 and liver disease severity based on abnormal liver biochemistries and other possible mechanisms in individuals of all ages from the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic to the post-pandemic period. The review also alludes to clinical perspectives of such interactions to curb overlapping hepatic diseases in people who recovered from the infection or living with long COVID-19.

Knowledge, Perceptions, and Readiness of Telepharmacy among Hospital Pharmacists in Saudi Arabia.

Telepharmacy is a technology-based service that provides promoted services such as counseling, medication administration and compounding, drug therapy monitoring, and prescription review. It is unclear whether hospital pharmacists possess the necessary knowledge, attitudes, and willingness to practice telepharmacy. The current study sought to investigate Saudi Arabian hospital pharmacists' understanding, attitudes, and level of preparedness for telepharmacy services. A total of 411 pharmacists responded to the survey. Only 43.33% of the respondents agreed that telepharmacy is available in Saudi Arabia and 36.67% of the respondents agreed that patients in rural areas can have more medication access and information via telepharmacy. Only 29.33% of pharmacists agreed that telepharmacy improves patient medication adherence, and about 34.00% of the pharmacists agreed that telepharmacy saves patients money and time by eliminating the need for them to travel to healthcare facilities. This research found that hospital pharmacists were unsure of their level of knowledge, their attitude toward telepharmacy, and their willingness to incorporate it into their future pharmacy practices. To ensure that tomorrow's pharmacists have the skills they need to provide telepharmacy services, telepharmacy practice models must be incorporated into the educational programs that prepare them.

A comparison of three thromboprophylaxis regimens in critically ill COVID-19 patients: An analysis of real-world data.

Introduction: Thrombotic complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have received considerable attention. Although numerous conflicting findings have compared escalated thromboprophylaxis doses with a standard dose to prevent thrombosis, there is a paucity of literature comparing clinical outcomes in three different anticoagulation dosing regimens. Thus, we investigated the effectiveness and safety profiles of standard, intermediate, and high-anti-coagulation dosing strategies in COVID-19 critically ill patients. Methodology: This retrospective multicenter cohort study of intensive care unit (ICU) patients from the period of April 2020 to August 2021 in four Saudi Arabian centers. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years, diagnosis with severe or critical COVID-19 infection, and receiving prophylactic anticoagulant dose within 24-48 h of ICU admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of thrombotic events, with mortality rate and minor or major bleeding serving as secondary endpoints. We applied survival analyses with a matching weights procedure to control for confounding variables in the three arms. Results: A total of 811 patient records were reviewed, with 551 (standard-dose = 192, intermediate-dose = 180, and high-dose = 179) included in the analysis. After using weights matching, we found that the standard-dose group was not associated with an increase in the composite thrombotic events endpoint when compared to the intermediate-dose group {19.8 vs. 25%; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) =1.46, [95% confidence of interval (CI), 0.94-2.26]} or when compared to high-dose group [19.8 vs. 24%; aHR = 1.22 (95% CI, 0.88-1.72)]. Also, there were no statistically significant differences in overall in-hospital mortality between the standard-dose and the intermediate-dose group [51 vs. 53.4%; aHR = 1.4 (95% CI, 0.88-2.33)] or standard-dose and high-dose group [51 vs. 61.1%; aHR = 1.3 (95% CI, 0.83-2.20)]. Moreover, the risk of major bleeding was comparable in all three groups [standard vs. intermediate: 4.8 vs. 2.8%; aHR = 0.8 (95% CI, 0.23-2.74); standard vs. high: 4.8 vs. 9%; aHR = 2.1 (95% CI, 0.79-5.80)]. However, intermediate-dose and high-dose were both associated with an increase in minor bleeding incidence with aHR = 2.9 (95% CI, 1.26-6.80) and aHR = 3.9 (95% CI, 1.73-8.76), respectively. Conclusion: Among COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU, the three dosing regimens did not significantly affect the composite of thrombotic events and mortality. Compared with the standard-dose regimen, intermediate and high-dosing thromboprophylaxis were associated with a higher risk of minor but not major bleeding. Thus, these data recommend a standard dose as the preferred regimen.

Factors Associated with Length of Hospital Stay among COVID-19 Patients in Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study during the First Pandemic Wave.

The COVID-19 pandemic severely affected healthcare systems and tested their preparedness. To date, the length of hospital stay (LoHS) and its factors among COVID-19 patients has not been thoroughly studied. Moreover, it is essential to identify the features of these patients. Adult COVID-19 patients in Saudi Arabia with complete electronic medical records and who were hospitalised for >1 day between 1 May 2020 and 30 July 2020 at one of two hospitals were considered for this retrospective cohort study. Descriptive statistics and multivariate generalized linear models were performed using the data. Of the patients, 34% were ≥50 years old and 80.14% were female. More than 70% had mild-to-moderate symptoms; 45% had either diabetes or hypertension. The median LoHS was 7.00 days (IQR: 3-11). Patients who were females, had either critical or severe disease, were on mechanical ventilation, had diabetes, and administered ceftriaxone had significantly longer LoHS (p < 0.05). Patients administered zinc sulphate had significantly shorter LoHS (p = 0.0008). During the first pandemic wave, COVID-19 patients were hospitalised for 7 days. Healthcare professionals should pay more attention to women, patients with diabetes, and those with severe or critical symptoms. Unnecessary use of ceftriaxone should be minimised, and zinc sulphate can be administered.

Comparison of the post-marketing safety profile between influenza and COVID-19 vaccines: An analysis of the vaccine adverse event reporting system.

The global coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic can be partially managed by vaccines; however, the public must be informed about the safety of COVID-19 vaccines to avoid hesitancy. Therefore, it is important to know the safety profile of the COVID-19 vaccine by comparison to that of a well-known vaccine, such as the influenza vaccine. Hence, this retrospective descriptive study was conducted to evaluate and compare the number of adverse effects (AEs) reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for both COVID-19 and influenza vaccines, identify the most common AEs of each vaccine, and compare the frequency and outcomes of using COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in the U.S. population. Surveillance reports from 1st December 2020 to 8th October 2021 of both vaccines were retrieved from the U.S. VAERS. A total of 544,025 and 15,871 reports of post-COVID-19 and - influenza vaccine AEs were reported to the VAERS, respectively. Females reported > 58% and nearly 70% of influenza - and COVID-19 vaccine-associated AEs, respectively. The estimated incidence rates of AEs associated with COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in the U.S. were 1.36 and 0.12 per 1,000 persons, respectively. The incidence of AEs was higher among COVID-19 vaccine recipients than that among influenza vaccine recipients. COVID-19 vaccine recipients have a two-fold higher risk of mortality and life-threatening events than influenza vaccine recipients. However, most of the reported AEs were similar between the two vaccines in terms of symptoms.

The economic burden of overweight and obesity in Saudi Arabia.

CONTEXT: The prevalence of overweight and obesity in Saudi Arabia has been rising. Although the health burden of excess weight is well established, little is known about the economic burden. AIMS: To assess the economic burden-both direct medical costs and the value of absenteeism and presenteeism-resulting from overweight and obesity in Saudi Arabia. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The cost of overweight and obesity in Saudi Arabia was estimated from a societal perspective using an epidemiologic approach. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Data were obtained from previously published studies and secondary databases. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Overweight/obesity-attributable costs were calculated for six major noncommunicable diseases; sensitivity analyses were conducted for key model parameters. RESULTS: The impact of overweight and obesity for these diseases is found to directly cost a total of $3.8 billion, equal to 4.3 percent of total health expenditures in Saudi Arabia in 2019. Estimated overweight and obesity-attributable absenteeism and presenteeism costs a total of $15.5 billion, equal to 0.9 percent of GDP in 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Even when limited to six diseases and a subset of total indirect costs, results indicate that overweight and obesity are a significant economic burden in Saudi Arabia. Future studies should identify strategies to reduce the health and economic burden resulting from excess weight in Saudi Arabia.

Impact of COVID-19 on Public Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Participating in Clinical Trials in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the knowledge and attitudes of patients among the Saudi population toward participating in clinical trials. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional analysis using self-administered questionnaires for patients who attended the outpatient clinics at King Fahad Medical City and King Saud University Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The questionnaires included general questions about sociodemographic information, patient knowledge about clinical trials, and patient attitudes toward clinical trial participation. We used descriptive analysis to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on patient knowledge and attitudes about clinical trials. RESULTS: From November 2019 to October 2020, 822 responses were collected from participants in two medical cities and included in the analysis. Most of the study participants (81%) were younger than age 42 years. Our findings showed no difference between participants who participated in clinical trials before versus during the COVID-19 pandemic (P = 0.129). CONCLUSION: The Saudi population knows about clinical trials, but they lack knowledge about the role of the ethics committee and about informed consent. Also, most of them do not have the experience of participating in a clinical trial. Still, they have moderately positive attitudes toward clinical trials.

Assessing the Severity of Illness in Patients With Coronavirus Disease in Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study.

Objectives: We aimed to describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia in various severity groups. Methods: Data for 485 patients were extracted from the medical records from the infectious disease center of Prince Mohammed bin Abdul Aziz Hospital in Riyadh. Patients' basic information, laboratory test results, signs and symptoms, medication prescribed, other comorbidities, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. Descriptive data were reported to examine the distribution of study variables between the severe and not severe groups. Results: Of 458 included patients, 411 (89.7%) were classified as not severe, 47 (10.3%) as severe. Most (59.1%) patients were aged between 20 and 39 years. Patients with severe conditions were non-Saudi, with a chronic condition history, and tended to have more chronic conditions compared with those without severe disease. Diabetes, hypertension, and thyroid disease were significantly higher in patients with severe disease. Death was reported in only 4.26% of severe patients. Only 16 (34.04%) patients remained in the hospital in the severe group. Conclusions: Severe cases were more likely to have more comorbidities, diabetes, hypertension, and thyroid disorders were most common compared with non-severe cases.

Comparing the impact of Hydroxychloroquine based regimens and standard treatment on COVID-19 patient outcomes: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological treatments including antivirals (Lopinavir/Ritonavir), Immuno-modulatory and anti-inflammatory drugs including, Tocilizumab and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been widely investigated as a treatment for COVID-19.Despite the ongoing controversies, HCQ was recommended for managing mild to moderate cases in Saudi Arabia . However, to our knowledge, no previous studies have been conducted in Saudi Arabia to assess its effectiveness. METHODS: A hospital-based retrospective cohort study involving 161 patients with COVID-19 was conducted from March 1 to May 20, 2020. The study was conducted at Prince Mohammed bin Abdul Aziz Hospital (PMAH).The population included hospitalized adults (age ≥ 18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. Each eligible patient was followed from the time of admission until the time of discharge. Patients were classified into two groups according to treatment type: in the HCQ group, patients were treated with HCQ; in the SC group, patients were treated with other antiviral or antibacterial treatments according to Ministry of Health (MOH) protocols.The outcomes were hospitalization days, ICU admission, and the need for mechanical ventilation.We estimated the differences in hospital length of stay and time in the ICU between the HCQ group and the standard care (SC) group using a multivariate generalized linear regression. The differences in ICU admission and mechanical ventilation were compared via logistic regression. All models were adjusted for age and gender variables. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Approximately 59% (n = 95) received HCQ-based treatment, and 41% (n = 66) received SC. Length of hospital stay and time in ICU in for patients who received HCQ based treatment was shorter than those who received SC. Similarly, there was less need for ICU admission and mechanical ventilation among patients who received HCQ based treatment compared with SC, (8.6% vs. 10.7 and 3.1% vs. 9.1%). However, the regression analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups in terms of patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: HCQ had a modest effect on hospital length stay and days in ICU compared with SC. However, these results need to be interpreted with caution. Larger observational studies and RCTs that evaluate the efficacy of HCQ in COVID-19 patients in the Saudi population are urgently needed.