Saudi Women's Perception of the Effect of COVID-19 Infection and Vaccination on Menstrual Cycle Length.

Background and Aim: This study was conducted in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to investigate the effects of the COVID-19 virus and the vaccine on menstrual periods. The data from this study would increase people's awareness of the impacts of the virus and its vaccines on menstrual periods and serve as a reference for further studies. Materials and Methods: The data was collected through a web link where standardized close-ended questionnaires were distributed via several social media platforms in Saudi Arabia. Results: The study included 691 respondents, with 411 women meeting the inclusion criteria. The majority of participants fell within the age range of 35-45, and 64% held at least a bachelor's degree. The Eastern region of Saudi Arabia had the highest percentage of participants, while the Northern region had the lowest. More than half of the participants were married, and 57% reported having been infected with COVID-19. The vast majority (99%) had received the COVID-19 vaccine, primarily the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. The study assessed the association between menstruation experience and symptoms in three situations: before infection or vaccination, after COVID-19 infection, and after vaccination. Differences were observed in the length of the menstrual cycle and flow, but no statistically significant differences were found for pelvic and back pain. Conclusions: The result of this current study suggests that COVID-19 infection and/or vaccination has several effects on the menstrual cycle which changes in menses are minimal and transient.

Practice in child restraint system use among attendees of Well-baby clinics in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Background: The systematic use of child restraint system (CRS) while driving has been promoted by the WHO to improve road safety. Objectives: To assess the levels of practice in CRS use for children aged ≤5 years among mothers attending the Well-baby clinics and to explore the associated factors and attitudes. Methods and Material: A cross-sectional study was conducted among mothers visiting the Well-baby clinics at five primary health care centers in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, using a multistage stratified-cluster sampling. Practice in CRS was assessed by interviewing the participants regarding the availability of a CRS in their car, usage frequency for a child <5 years, and alternative child-sitting methods. Sociodemographic data, further road safety parameters, and attitudes were analyzed as independent factors of adequate practice using multivariate logistic regression. Results: Of the 192 included mothers, eight (4.2%) had a history of accident while driving with a child. Majority of the participants (62.5%) declared not having their cars equipped with a CRS and used inappropriate car-sitting methods. Of the 37.5% who had CRS in their cars, 27.1% declared using it always or frequently. Adequate practice in CRS was independently associated with mother's age (OR = 0.91, P = 0.09), low (OR = 0.10, P = 0.001) and moderate family income (OR = 0.23, P = 0.012), and the belief that CRS is not essential while driving with children (0.32, P = 0.023). Conclusions: There is inadequate practice in child road safety among families attending the Well-baby clinics in Western Saudi Arabia, which is associated with several misconceptions and negative attitudes towards the utility of CRS.

Pandemics, professionalism and the duty of care: Concerns from the coalface.

It is likely that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic will affect a large part of the world's population and will last for several years. Many critical ethical issues have arisen in the healthcare context. While response from healthcare professionals to participating in the care of patients in the era of COVID-19 has generally been positive, there have also been disturbing experiences on the ground. The practice of medicine is a social contract with humanity. Challenges have arisen because the patient is both a victim and a vector of the coronavirus. All humans should have a natural instinct to care for those in need. Ethically and legally, healthcare professionals cannot be expected to assume a significant and unreasonable risk of harm. While fear is understandable, altruism and interest in serving the sick exemplify the value of solidarity. Social harms like stigmatisation and discrimination can occur. Concerns have been raised regarding protection of privacy and respect for rights of infected individuals. In the era of COVID-19, fear, misinformation and a detachment from one's calling put professionalism strongly to the test.

Resource allocation during COVID-19: A focus on vulnerable populations

South Africa (SA) is a country of contrasts, with abundant resources, hard-won civil rights and a diverse population. Woven into the fabric of our society is a large divide between its poorest and its wealthiest members. In this article we highlight the vulnerabilities in our society that have been amplified by the COVID-19 crisis. Based on recent projections, it is very likely that the healthcare system will be overwhelmed. We acknowledge the recognition by government and civil society of these vulnerabilities, and note that difficult decisions will need to be made with regard to resource allocation. Our plea, however, is to ensure that human dignity and the principle of distributive justice are maintained, and that when difficult decisions are made, vulnerable people do not suffer disproportionately. Furthermore, it is of great concern that there is no national directive guiding resource allocation, prioritisation and triage decisions in both public and private hospitals. The Health Professions Council of SA should, as a matter of urgency, issue guidance on priority-setting and triage decisions in the context of COVID-19, based on distributive justice principles

Pandemics, professionalism and the duty of care: Concerns from the coalface

It is likely that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic will affect a large part of the world's population and will last for several years. Many critical ethical issues have arisen in the healthcare context. While response from healthcare professionals to participating in the care of patients in the era of COVID-19 has generally been positive, there have also been disturbing experiences on the ground. The practice of medicine is a social contract with humanity. Challenges have arisen because the patient is both a victim and a vector of the coronavirus. All humans should have a natural instinct to care for those in need. Ethically and legally, healthcare professionals cannot be expected to assume a significant and unreasonable risk of harm. While fear is understandable, altruism and interest in serving the sick exemplify the value of solidarity. Social harms like stigmatisation and discrimination can occur. Concerns have been raised regarding protection of privacy and respect for rights of infected individuals. In the era of COVID-19, fear, misinformation and a detachment from one's calling put professionalism strongly to the test

Global injustice in sport: The Caster Semenya ordeal - prejudice, discrimination and racial bias.

The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) requires the blood testosterone level of female athletes with differences of sex development to be reduced to below 5 nmol/L for a continuous period of at least 6 months, and thereafter to be maintained to below 5 nmol/L continuously for as long as the athlete wishes to remain eligible. Its ruling is based on questionable research findings. Medical decisions and interventions should be based on evidence from well-designed and well-conducted research and confirmatory studies. Caster Semenya, the reigning 800-meter Olympic champion since 2015, has challenged this ruling. Gender verification was instituted with women's participation in the Olympics in 1900, and female athletes were subjected to invasive, embarrassing and humiliating procedures. In its many decades of harsh scrutiny of successful female athletes, especially those from backgrounds similar to Semenya's, the IAAF has disrespected human rights and medical ethics and allowed prejudice, discrimination and injustice to infringe on their dignity and relentlessly obstruct their international sporting careers.

Protecting participants in health research: The South African Material Transfer Agreement.

The need to transfer human biological materials (HBMs) across national boundaries has become increasingly important in view of increased biobank and commercial activities globally. In light of South Africa (SA)'s history of colonisation and racial discrimination, coupled with well-known instances of exploitation of research participants in the developing world, it is critical that the management of HBMs from and to other jurisdictions is explored and regulated. Material transfer agreements (MTAs) represent an important point of departure in such a process. This article explores the need for a uniform MTA in SA and discusses some aspects of the recently gazetted national MTA, which provides a framework that can serve as a safeguard for cross-border transfer of HBMs in the absence of the National Health Act's chapter 8 regulations in this regard.

The National Education, Health and Allied Workers' Union (NEHAWU) strikes: South Africa's healthcare battlefield.

The right to strike is a fundamental right entrenched in section 23 of the Bill of Rights. Strikes are an almost everyday occurrence in South Africa and strikes in healthcare facilities raise difficult and complex moral and ethical questions. The right to strike is conditionally limited by section 36 of the Constitution and for workers engaging in essential services it is further limited under section 65 of the Labour Relations Act. Healthcare practitioners, including emergency care personnel, and much-needed healthcare facilities have come under attack during the National Education, Health and Allied Workers' Union (NEHAWU) strikes, which have prevented patients from accessing healthcare and threatened the training of undergraduate students and registrars. While generally security and policing have been lacking at targeted facilities, many doctors stood by their patients despite threats to their safety. Healthcare facilities, vehicles and practitioners must be protected. Solutions must come from politicians and include preventive actions and enforcement of the law.

The Life Esidimeni tragedy: Moral pathology and an ethical crisis.

The Life Esidimeni tragedy highlights several ethical transgressions. Health professionals' ethics are put to the test when their own interests are balanced against competing claims. Core values of compassion, competence and autonomy, together with respect for fundamental human rights, serve as the foundation of ethical practice in healthcare. These values are increasingly being challenged by governments and other third parties. The duties conferred on healthcare practitioners require them to act responsibly and be accountable for their actions. Codes in healthcare serve as a source of moral authority. The Gauteng health authorities exerted tremendous power and created a culture of fear and disempowerment among healthcare practitioners. When health professionals choose to support state interests instead of those of patients, problematic dual-loyalty conflicts arise.

The research ethics evolution: from Nuremberg to Helsinki.

Health research sets out to acquire not only theoretical knowledge but also benefits for many people and often society as a whole, and is therefore justified. The quandary, though, is how such an important, shared purpose can be pursued with full protection of individuals and communities, in particular those with vulnerabilities. Abuses in the field surfaced in the early 1800s, and by the 1890s, anti-vivisectionists were calling for laws to protect children because of the increasing numbers of institutionalised children being subjected to unethical research. When read together, the Nuremberg Code and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights can be interpreted as establishing a basis for underpinning the principles of free and informed consent and avoiding harms and exploitation in scientific experiments involving human participants. The Declaration of Helsinki has been recognised as one of the most authoritative statements on ethical standards for human research in the world.

Biobank research: time for discussion and debate.

The establishment of biobanks is gaining prominence globally. The open and evolving nature of biobanks has profound ethical, legal and social implications for individual and group autonomy, informed consent, privacy, confidentiality, secondary use of samples and data over time, return of results, data sharing, benefit sharing with communities, and premature or unplanned closure. Complexities also emerge because of increasing international collaborations, and differing national positions. Public consultation and involvement are very necessary to the success of biobanks. Implementing national laws in an internationally consistent manner is problematic.

Professionalism in the intimate examination: how healthcare practitioners feel about having chaperones present during an intimate consultation and examination.

BACKGROUND: Despite the clear prohibition against sexual relations with one's patients, complaints of a sexual nature against practitioners registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) have been increasing. The HPCSA does not provide ethical guidelines regarding the use of a chaperone during intimate examinations. AIMS: (i) To ascertain how a group of medical practitioners felt about the presence of chaperones during the consultation and intimate examination of patients; (ii) to determine whether they currently engage the services of chaperones; (iii) to assess how they felt about consensual sexual relationships between medical practitioners and their patients. Methods. A self-administered, questionnaire-based survey was distributed to gynaecologists and medical practitioners. RESULTS: There was a 43% response rate with 72% of practitioners in favour of using a chaperone during an intimate examination, although only 27% always do so. Most practitioners felt that consensual sexual relationships with patients are unacceptable; 83% felt that ethical guidelines on this topic were needed. CONCLUSION: The HPCSA should develop guidelines on the use of chaperones to assist practitioners. With medical litigation increasing, using chaperones will benefit patients and practitioners.