COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Hesitancy Among Health Care Workers in Lebanon.

BACKGROUND: Lebanon endured its worst economic and financial crisis in 2020-2021. To minimize the impact of COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to improve the overall COVID-19 vaccination rate. Given that vaccine hesitancy among health care workers (HCWs) affects the general population's decision to be vaccinated, our study assessed COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among Lebanon HCWs and identified barriers, demographic differences, and the most trusted sources of COVID-19 information. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between January and May 2021 among HCWs across nine hospitals, the Orders of Physicians, Nurses, and Pharmacists in Lebanon. Descriptive statistics were performed to evaluate the COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, and univariate and multivariable to identify their predictors. RESULTS: Among 879 participants, 762 (86.8%) were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine, 52 (5.9%) refused, and 64 (7.3%) were undecided. Males (226/254; 88.9%) and those ≥ 55 years (95/100; 95%) had the highest rates of acceptance. Of the 113 who were not willing to receive the vaccine, 54.9% reported that the vaccine was not studied well enough. Participants with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and those who did not know if they had a previous infection (p = 0.002) were less likely to accept the vaccine compared to those with no previous infection. The most trusted COVID-19 sources of information were WHO (69.3%) and healthcare providers (68%). CONCLUSION: Lebanese HCWs had a relatively high acceptance rate for COVID-19 vaccination compared to other countries. Our findings are important in informing the Lebanese health care authorities to establish programs and interventions to improve vaccine uptake among HCWs and the general population.

Long-term Comparison of a Large Spot Vacuum Assisted Handpiece vs the Small Spot Size Traditional Handpiece of the 800 nm Diode Laser.

BACKGROUND The 800 nm long-pulsed diode laser machine is safe and effective for permanent hair reduction. Traditionally, most long-pulsed diode lasers used for hair removal had a relatively small spot size. Recently, a long-pulsed diode laser with a large spot size and vacuum assisted suction handpiece was introduced. The treatment parameters of each type of handpiece differ. Short and long-term clinical efficacy, treatment associated pain, and patient satisfaction are important factors to be considered. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to conduct a direct head to head comparison of both handpieces of the 800nm long-pulsed diode laser by evaluating long term hair reduction, treatment associated pain and patient satisfaction. METHODS: Thirteen subjects were enrolled in this prospective, self-controlled, single-center study of axillary laser hair removal. The study involved 4 treatments using a long pulsed diode laser with a large spot size HS handpiece (single pass), HS handpiece (double pass), and a small spot size ET handpiece according to a randomized choice. The treatment sessions were done at 4-8 week intervals with follow up visits taken at 6 and 12 months after the last treatment session. Hair clearance and thickness analysis were assessed using macro hair count photographs taken at baseline visit, at each treatment session visit and at follow up visits. Other factors including pain, treatment duration, and patients' preference were secondary study endpoints. RESULTS: At 6 months follow up visits after receiving four laser treatments, there was statistically significant hair clearance in the three treatment arms with 66.1 % mean percentage hair reduction with the ET handpiece, 43.6% with the HSS (single pass) and 64.1 % with the HSD (double). However, at one year follow up, the results significantly varied from the 6 months follow up. The mean percentage hair reduction was 57.8% with the ET handpiece treated axillas (n=9), 16.5% with the HSS (single pass) handpiece treated axillas (n=7), and 46.9% with the HSD (double pass) handpiece treated axillas (n=6). Thus, at one year follow up, there was a significant hair reduction that was similar in both the ET and HSD treated axillae (57.8% and 46.9 %), but only minimal hair reduction (16.5%)was observed in the HSS treated axillae. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that compared the long-term efficacy of the ET and HS handpieces after four treatment sessions with up to 12 months follow up after the last treatment session. It is also the first study that provided head to head comparison between HS (double pass), HS (single pass), and ET handpiece taking into consideration the end hair reduction result, the time consumed, the pain score experienced, and the overall patient satisfaction. HSD had better hair clearance and patient satisfaction when compared to ET and HSS. The long term follow up results showed that ET was superior to HSS (P less than .05), but was not superior to HSD (P greater than 0.05). However, HSD treated patients had lower pain scores with HSD than with ET. We conclude that ET handpiece is almost as efficacious as HSD handpiece, and the desired end results could be achieved with HDD with better patient satisfaction, less treatment duration and less pain.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(9):893-898.