RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Asymptomatic individuals could be a source of spreading the infection, especially in their households. Triaging and testing an individual for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection rely on the criteria included in the adopted triaging instrument, and adopted case definition of a suspected case. They both may need to be reviewed and modified to make them more effective in making the right decision. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was used to find out the effectiveness of triaging instrument and the case definition used in the fever clinic (FC) in one of our primary care centers. The data of 630 randomly selected participants who were tested in our center between April 12 and August 12 2020 were analyzed. RESULTS: About 36.8% of the 630 tested participants were positive for COVID-19. Symptomatic patients were 3.93 (95% CI; 2.58, 5.98; P < 0.001) times more likely to test positive than asymptomatic ones. The participants with a history of contact with a COVID-19 confirmed case were 1.47 (95% CI; 1.03, 2.10; P = 0.032) times more likely to test positive compared to those without such history. Symptomatic with and without history of contact were 8.40 (95% CI; 3.23, 21.86; P < 0.001) and 4.91 (95% CI; 1.84, 13.09; P < 0.001) times more likely to test positive compared to asymptomatic contact, respectively. Moreover, patients with comorbidity were also 1.85 (95% CI; 1.31, 2.60; P < 0.001) times more likely to test positive than healthy ones. The mean of the number of the households, and the mean of the number of households tested positive significantly exceeded the means of those tested negative by 1.03 (95% CI; 0.48, 1.57; P < 0.001), and 0.98 (95% CI; 0.68, 1.28; P < 0.001), respectively. From the studied triaging items only symptoms, comorbidities, and the number of households tested positive were independently associated with testing positive. Moreover, from studied symptoms, only fever, cough, myalgia, and loss of taste and smell were independently associated with testing positive. Finally, from the studied comorbidities, only diabetes mellitus was independently associated with testing positive. CONCLUSION: At the time of outbreak and pandemic, people get worried and need to be reassured, and contacts would then seek testing. However, resources including manpower, material, and money need to be protected and used wisely. Thus, the adoption of an evidence-based updated testing policy is crucially needed. Furthermore, early identification of the potential sources of the infection is also crucially needed to control the spreading of the infection.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the knowledge and attitudes towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) among the students of King Saud University. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional survey among King Saud University students, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which took place on December 17-20, 2006. The data was collected via self-administered questionnaires prepared in Arabic. The questionnaires were distributed to all 15 colleges of the University. RESULTS: Out of a study sample of 2250 students, 31% did not have prior CPR information. Of those with previous knowledge, 85% feel that it is inadequate. The most common sources of information were television and movies. The 12.7% of individuals encountered a situation that required the use of CPR. However, only 14% of them performed it. This was mostly due to lack of knowledge (48.2%). Eighty eight percent of students would like to learn how to perform CPR. Out of all King Saud University students, 45% believe that CPR training should be a graduation requirement. CONCLUSION: It was found that the overall attitude towards CPR was positive. However, the knowledge on the topic was insufficient. Thus, more focus should be placed on the improvement of CPR skills. In addition, more studies are needed to assess knowledge and attitudes towards CPR in the community.