Determinants of Z-Score of Bone Mineral Density among Premenopausal Saudi Females in Different Age Groups: A Cross Sectional Study.

This is a comparative multicenter cross-sectional study that evaluated the potential determinants of Z-scores among premenopausal Saudi women before and after the age of peak bone density. The Study concluded that for better BMD among premenopausal women, attention should be paid to early physical activity and healthy nutrition, especially vitamin D, during the childbearing period. OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential determinants of Z-scores among premenopausal Saudi females in different age groups before and after the expected age of peak bone density (PBD). METHODS: This multicenter comparative cross-sectional study was conducted in Madinah and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, between August 2021 and March 2022. We recruited 886 premenopausal females (605 (68.3%) below and 281 (31.7%) at or above the age of 30). The structured pre-coded Arabic questionnaire included sociodemographic data, a BMD questionnaire, menstrual history, an Arab Teen Lifestyle Study questionnaire, and food frequency data. Metabolic Equivalents (METs) were calculated from physical activity. Analysis of serum PTH, 25(OH) vitamin D (VD) was performed with chemiluminescent immunoassay. BMD was measured with a calcaneal qualitative ultrasound. RESULTS: Most women had age-matched Z-scores, with very few (24 (2.7%)) being non-age-matched with no identified secondary causes. Significant Z-score determinants before PBD were BMI (OR: 0.167, p = 0.003) and total METs (OR: 0.160, p < 0.005). After the age of PBD, significant predictors were parity (OR: 0.340, p = 0.042), history of vitamin D deficiency (OR: 0.352, p = 0.048), and BMI (OR: 0.497, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Early determinants of Z-scores among premenopausal women were the nutritional status and physical activity. After the age of PBD, parity and vitamin D status offer additional determinants. For better BMD, attention should be paid to early physical activity and healthy nutrition, especially for vitamin D, with intensification of efforts during the childbearing period.

Utilization of Antibiotics for Hospitalized Patients with Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Al-Madinah Al-Munawara, Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study.

Background: Most patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with severe Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia receive antibacterial antibiotics with little evidence of bacterial infections. Objective: This study was designed to review the profiles of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care, the rate of bacterial coinfection, the antibiotics used, and their relation to patient outcomes (death or recovery). Methods: This was a retrospective study that reviewed the medical records of all patients with confirmed COVID-19 (n = 120) severe pneumonia admitted directly from the emergency room to the intensive care unit, at a public hospital during the period from May 2020 to April 2021. The data collected included patients' demographic and laboratory data, comorbidities, antibiotic treatment, and their outcome. Descriptive statistics, bivariate inferential analysis tests (chi-square and unpaired T-Tests) and multivariable binary logistic regression were performed. Results: The mean age of the patients was 56.8 ± 16.5 years old, and among them, 74 (62.7%) were males. Of the included patients, 92 (77.0%) had comorbidities, 76 (63.3%) required mechanical ventilation and 30 (25%) died. All patients received empirical antibiotics for suspected bacterial coinfection. The most common antibiotics used were azithromycin (n = 97, 8%) and imipenem (n = 83, 9%). Ninety patients (75%) were on two empirical antibiotics. Early positive cultures for pathogens were found only in four patients (3.3%), whereas 36 (30%) patients had positive cultures 5-10 days after admission. The most frequently isolated pathogens were Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 16) and coagulase-negative Staphylococci (n = 14). In bivariate analysis empirical treatment with azithromycin resulted in a significantly lower mortality rate (p = 0.023), meanwhile mechanical ventilation, days of stay in intensive care unit, morbidities (e.g., lung disease), linezolid and, vancomycin use associated with mortality (p< 0.05). The adjusted logistic regression, controlling for age and gender, revealed that azithromycin antibiotic was more likely protective from mortality (OR= 0.22, 95%CI 0.06-0.85, p=0.028. However, patients with lung diseases and under mechanical ventilation were 35.21 and 19.57 more likely to die (95%CI =2.84-436.70, p=0.006; 95%CI=2.66-143.85, p=0.003, respectively). Conclusion: Bacterial coinfection with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care was unlikely. The benefit of Azithromycin over other antibiotics could be attributed to its anti-inflammatory properties rather than its antibacterial effect.