Exploring the reported adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines among vaccinated Arab populations: a multi-national survey study.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a major challenge worldwide for the past years with high morbidity and mortality rates. While vaccination was the cornerstone to control the pandemic and disease spread, concerns regarding safety and adverse events (AEs) have been raised lately. A cross-sectional study was conducted between January 1st and January 22nd, 2022, in six Arabic countries namely Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Algeria. We utilized a self-administered questionnaire validated in Arabic which encompassed two main parts. The first was regarding sociodemographic data while the second was about COVID-19 vaccination history, types, doses, and experienced AEs. A multistage sampling was employed in each country, involving the random selection of three governorates from each country, followed by the selection of one urban area and one rural area from each governorate. We included the responses of 1564 participants. The most common AEs after the first and second doses were local AEs (67.9% and 46.6%, respectively) followed by bone pain and myalgia (37.6% and 31.8%, respectively). After the third dose, the most common AEs were local AEs (45.7%) and fever (32.4%). Johnson and Johnson, Sputnik Light, and Moderna vaccines showed the highest frequency of AEs. Factors associated with AEs after the first dose included an increase in age (aOR of 61-75 years compared to the 12-18 years group: 2.60, 95% CI: 1.59-4.25, p = 0.001) and male gender (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.63-0.82, p < 0.001). The cumulative post-vaccination COVID-19 disease was reported with Sinovac (16.1%), Sinopharm (15.8%), and Johnson and Johnson (14.9) vaccines. History of pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection significantly increases the risk of post-vaccination COVID-19 after the first, second, and booster doses (OR: 3.09, CI: 1.9-5.07, p < 0.0001; OR: 2.56, CI: 1.89-3.47, p < 0.0001; and OR: 2.94, CI: 1.6-5.39, p = 0.0005 respectively). In conclusion, AEs were common among our participants, especially local AEs. Further extensive studies are needed to generate more generalizable data regarding the safety of different vaccines.

Construct validity of a clinically correlated knee osteoarthritis ultrasonographic scale: a cross-sectional observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the validity of a novel ultrasonographic scale for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and its relation with the degree of pain and clinical features. DESIGN: A cross-sectional observational study including 245 patients with knee pain who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology criteria for KOA. All patients were subjected to clinical assessment Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Index of Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) scale, global visual analogue scale (VAS) and functional assessment through the use of Health Assessment Questionnaire-II (HAQ-II). Ultrasonographic assessment was conducted following ZAGAZIG scale comprising five domains: one for degenerative features (one-third of total score) and the other four for inflammatory features (two-thirds of score). RESULTS: There were positive correlations between ZAGAZIG score and all WOMAC subscales (pain, stiffness and function) (r=0.71, p=0.00; r=0.62, p=0.00; r=0.70, p=0.00, respectively).Moreover, there was a strong positive correlation between ZAGAZIG scale and both VAS and HAQ-II (r=0.82, p=0.00 and r=0.67, p=0.00). At cut-off point of >5, total US score distinguishes between patients with KOA with no or mild pain and those with moderate pain (87.2 sensitivity and 87.2 specificity). At cut-off point of 7, total score of ZAGAZIG scale distinguishes between patients with KOA with moderate pain and those with severe pain (94.5 sensitivity and 42.5 specificity). CONCLUSION: ZAGAZIG scale constitutes a validated tool for KOA assessment. ZAGAZIG scale correlated with WOMAC subscales (pain, stiffness and function), VAS and HAQ.

Consensus evidence-based recommendations for treat-to-target management of immunoglobulin A vasculitis.

IgA vasculitis (IgAV), formerly known as Henoch-Schönlein purpura, is the most common cause of systemic vasculitis in childhood. Given its potential life-threatening systemic complications, early and accurate diagnosis as well as management of IgAV represent a major challenge for health care professionals. This study was carried out to attain an evidence-based expert consensus on a treat-to-target management approach for IgAV using Delphi technique. The preliminary scientific committee identified a total of 16 key clinical questions according to the patient, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) approach. An evidence-based, systematic, literature review was conducted to compile evidence for the IgAV management. The core leadership team identified researchers and clinicians with expertise in IgAV management in Egypt upon which experts were gathered from different governorates and health centers across Egypt. Delphi process was implemented (two rounds) to reach a consensus. An online questionnaire was sent to expert panel (n = 26) who participated in the two rounds. After completing round 2, a total of 20 recommendation items, categorized into two sections were obtained. Agreement with the recommendations (rank 7-9) ranged from 91.7-100%. Consensus was reached (i.e. ⩾75% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed) on the wording of all the 20 clinical standards identified by the scientific committee. Algorithms for the diagnosis and management have been suggested. This was an expert, consensus recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of IgAV and IgA vasculitic nephritis, based on best available evidence and expert opinion. The guideline presented a strategy of care with a pathway to achieve a state of remission as early as possible. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Given its potential life-threatening systemic complications, early and accurate diagnosis of immunoglobulin A vasculitis represents a major challenge for health care professionals. This work provided cornerstone principles for the management of the condition. Adopting PICO approach and implementing Delphi process a consensus was reached on evidence-based treat-to-target treatment recommendations. This will endorse enhancement and consistency of care of this cohort of patients in standard practice.