ABSTRACT
Introduction The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations are early initiation of breastfeeding and exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first six months of infants' lives. Despite the WHO and UNICEF recommendations and expanding evidence of the significance of exclusive breastfeeding, about two-thirds of infants worldwide have not received exclusive breastfeeding for the six recommended months. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of working mothers exclusively breastfeeding in the first six months of infants' lives and investigate their predictors in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods A cross-sectional community-based study was conducted for four months in 2022. The study included working mothers who have a child in the age range of 6-24 months living in Riyadh. Data was collected through an online questionnaire and analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 29 (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY) program. Results A sample of 118 participants were included in the study. Their prevalence for EBF practice for the recommended period is 28% (n=33). Around 58.5% (n=69) of the participants did not receive breastfeeding counseling during antenatal visits. Almost half the infants were given prelacteal feeding. Male infants are two times more likely to be exclusively breastfed for the recommended period than female infants. Work-related pressures were a key factor in the discontinuation of breastfeeding (53.4%, n=63). Conclusion This study highlights the lack of breastfeeding counseling and breastfeeding work regulation, alongside concerns about colostrum avoidance and prelacteal feeding. While EBF rates show progress, delayed initiation and work-related pressures remain challenges. Gender disparity in exclusive breastfeeding urges targeted interventions for more equitable outcomes.
ABSTRACT
Background As a result of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, global health was significantly affected. Therefore, the booster dose was approved to be administered to people who had completed a primary vaccination series in order to enhance their immunity. This study aims to identify the factors that lead to willingness or hesitancy toward the third/booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, to estimate the rate of acceptance and hesitancy toward the third/booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, and to measure third/booster dose COVID-19 vaccine literacy among residents of Riyadh. Methods This study is a quantitative analytical cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study from March 2022 to December 2022. The data were gathered using a convenience sampling technique from 435 participants in the Riyadh region 16 years old and above by using a validated questionnaire. Results Among the participants, 72.6% were females; 53.4% of young participants aged 16-25 years had a good knowledge of the booster dose versus 26.2% of those aged 45 years or above, with reported statistical significance (P=0.001). The functional literacy of the COVID-19 vaccine which is defined as the ability to read and write effectively was higher among the non-hesitant group compared to the hesitant group. The interactive/critical literacy of the COVID-19 vaccine, which is defined as the advanced abilities that enable people to make sense of information so they may take decisions that are relevant to their own lives, was higher among the non-hesitant group compared to the hesitant group. 72.2% of the study participants reported that if the booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine was not mandatory by the government, they would not have taken it. Also, 19.1% thought that taking the booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine would endanger their lives. Conclusion The findings of the current study revealed that the factors leading to the willingness or hesitancy toward the booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine include age, gender, and side effects. Also, measuring the COVID-19 vaccine literacy revealed that it is higher among the non-hesitant group than the hesitant group although it was statistically insignificant. Meanwhile, further studies should be done to track and measure COVID-19 vaccine literacy over time, and examine the factors associated with the booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy for more validation and application.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot disease (DFD) is a significant complication associated with diabetes, characterized by the potential for progressive amputation of specific foot segments or the entire lower limb in the absence of timely identification of infection and intervention. The aim of our research is to evaluate the degree of importance given to foot care by healthcare professionals who are responsible for treating individuals with diabetes in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. METHODS: This cross-sectional study utilized an online survey previously validated in Australia. The mean foot care prioritization score was used to identify the dummy variable for binary logistic regression analysis, which was used to identify predictors of foot care prioritization. RESULTS: A total of 222 participants were involved in this study. Assessing for the risk of developing foot complications, visually inspecting feet for wounds, and providing or recommending footwear to prevent foot complications were the most commonly reported practices, accounting for 80.60% (n = 178), 76.10% (n = 169), and 75.20% (n = 167), respectively. The most commonly referred patients to a specialist tertiary multi-disciplinary foot care team were patients with ulcers in patients with absent foot pulses, ulcers with ascending cellulitis, and diabetic ulceration, accounting for 73.50% (n = 163), 71.60% (n = 159), and 66.70% (n = 148), respectively. The mean foot care prioritization score for the study participants was 54.1 (standard deviation: 11.7) out of 78 (69.4%), which demonstrates a moderately high level of foot care prioritization. Binary logistic regression analysis identified that healthcare professionals who are aged 35-44 years, those who have 5-10 years of experience, those who work at private hospitals, those who have a higher number of practice clinics per week, and those who have to manage a higher number of patients with diabetes in each clinic were more likely to prioritize foot care in their practices (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study found that healthcare professionals in Saudi Arabia place a moderate degree of emphasis on foot care. Healthcare professionals falling within the age range of 35-44 years, possessing 5-10 years of experience, employed at private hospitals, overseeing a greater number of practice clinics weekly, and managing a greater number of patients with diabetes per clinic exhibited a greater propensity to prioritize foot care within their respective practices. Policymakers should consider the integration of continuous glucose monitoring technologies, the establishment of standardized foot screening protocols, and the implementation of targeted educational programs for healthcare professionals.
