Sex differences in clinical features, utilization of oral anticoagulant agents, and 1-year outcome in Middle Eastern patients with atrial fibrillation.

OBJECTIVE: Studies have revealed that sex can predict differences in multiple aspects of atrial fibrillation (AF). These differences are underreported in the Middle East. This study aims to describe sex-specific differences in risk factors, symptomatology, management, and outcomes in Middle Eastern patients with AF. METHODS: The JoFib (Jordan-Atrial-Fibrillation) study is an observational, prospective, multicenter, nationwide registry in AF. Comparisons were made between female and male patients using Pearson chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests. Multivariable regression models were constructed to investigate whether the female sex was predictive of any AF-related outcomes (all-cause death, cardiovascular death, ischemic stroke or systemic embolism [IS/SE], major bleeding, and clinically relevant non-major bleeding). RESULTS: Of 2,020 patients with AF, 54% (n = 1091) were females. Females with AF were older (median age 71 vs. 69, p <.001), but had less heart failure (20.9% vs. 27.2%, p = .001) and coronary artery disease (7.5% vs. 14.7%, p <.001). Females with AF were more symptomatic (74.7% vs. 66.5%, p <.001) and frequently received anticoagulant therapy (84.4% vs. 78.9%, p = .001). Rhythm control was pursued less frequently in females (23.4% vs. 27.3%, p = .04). All studied outcomes occurred with similar frequencies in females and males, and sex was not significantly predictive of any outcome. CONCLUSION: Females with AF are more symptomatic, yet they are treated less with rhythm control. Despite higher risk, females have similar risk-adjusted all-cause cardiovascular death and stroke rates compared to males. Future studies should explore how treatments and interventions can influence quality-of-life and cardiovascular outcomes in females with AF.

The risk of COVID-19 infection among nurses working with COVID-19 patients.

Working with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients is currently considered one of the main fears and challenges that face healthcare workers (HCWs), especially nurses. This challenge can jeopardize the quality of health care services for those patients and cause a serious mental burden to HCWs. To understand and estimate the risk of COVID-19 infection among HCWs who directly serve COVID-19 patients. Before the community spread of the disease, 270 nurses who worked with COVID-19 wards were followed for 11 weeks to report the COVID-19 cases. On the other hand, during the community spread of the disease, 981 registered nurses (300 worked in COVID-19 wards and 681 worked in non-COVID wards) were followed for up to 16 weeks to report the COVID-19 cases. Before the community spread of COVID-19, none of the nurses who worked with the COVID-19 patients got the infection. On the other hand, during the community spread of the COVID-19 infection, 30% of the 300 nurses who worked in the COVID-19 wards got the COVID-19 infection, while 64% of the 681 HCWs who worked in the non-COVID wards got the infection. The relative risk of getting COVID-19 infection among HCWs who worked in the COVID-19 wards was reduced to about half in comparison to other HCWs who worked in the non-COVID wards (RR = 0.469). HCWs should not fear working with COVID-19 patients. Considering appropriate personal protective measures and infection control standards, the risk of infection transmission from the community is higher than that of COVID-19 patients, if any.

Self-Reported Obsession Toward COVID-19 Preventive Measures Among Undergraduate Medical Students During the Early Phase of Pandemic in Jordan.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and its associated precautionary measures have substantial impacts not only on the medical, economic, and social context but also on psychological health. This study aimed to assess the obsession toward COVID-19 preventive measures among undergraduate medical students during the early phase of the pandemic in Jordan. Methods: Online questionnaires were distributed between March 16, 2020 and March 19, 2020. Socio-demographic characteristics were collected, and self-reported obsession toward COVID-19 preventive measures was assessed using a single question.COVID-19 knowledge, risk perception, and precautionary measures were evaluated using scales. Using the chi-square test, Student t-test, and one-way ANOVA, we assessed the differences in the obsession of students with socio-demographic characteristics and scores of the scales. Results: A total of 1,404 participants (60% were female participants) completed the survey with a participation rate of 15.6%. Obsession with preventive measures was reported by 6.8%. Obsession was significantly more common among women (9.2%) than men (3.3%) and students who attended COVID-19 lectures (9.5%) than those who did not attend such lectures (5.8%) (p < 0.001 and p = 0.015, respectively). Obsessed participants reported significantly higher levels of COVID-19 knowledge (p = 0.012) and precautionary measures (p < 0.001). COVID-19 risk perception had a mild effect size difference but with no statistical significance (p = 0.075). There were no significant differences in the academic levels of participants (p = 0.791) and universities (p = 0.807) between students who were obsessed and those who were not. Conclusions: Obsession is one of the significant but unspoken psychological effects of COVID-19 precautionary measures among undergraduate medical students. Medical schools should be equipped with means to handle pandemic psychological effects.