RESUMO
Purpose: This study aimed to determine the stress levels and identify various factors responsible for causing high-stress scores during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Saudi population. Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, from June 2020 until December 2020 on 4052 respondents from the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. An online survey was used to collect information about various stress factors. The psychological impact of COVID-19 was measured by using the COVID-19 impact event scale (COVID-19 IES), whereas general stress levels were assessed by K10 Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10). Results: The psychological impact of the COVID-19 outbreak revealed that 35.4% of participants suffered from moderate or severe psychological impact (score>33); 19.7% had a mild psychological impact (scores24-32), whereas 44.9% reported minimal psychological impact (score <23). The factors significantly associated with higher stress scores and COVID-19 IES included male gender, low monthly income, having a private business, living in apartments/residential complexes, poor general health status, visit hospital/doctor in the past three months, presence of chronic disease, direct/indirect contact with someone diagnosed with/suspected to have COVID-19, contact with surfaces/tools infected with COVID-19, getting screened or quarantined for COVID-19, follow-up of the latest news about COVID-19 and knowledge of a greater number of people infected and died with COVID-19 (p < 0.05). In contrast, being an elementary school student, having 4-10 children, observing various protective measures, and staying home for 4-12 hours were associated with lower COVID-19 IES (p < 0.05). Conclusion: During the initial six months of the COVID-19 outbreak in Saudi Arabia, 35.4% participants suffered from moderate to the severe psychological impact. This study identified various factors responsible for high COVID-19 IES and K10 stress scores. These findings can help formulate psychological interventions for improving the stress scales in vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Detection of ß-thalassemia trait or carriers (ß-TT) depends significantly on an increase in Hemoglobin A2 (HbA2) levels, which is found at low levels (<3%) in normal healthy individuals and elevated levels (≥3.5%) in ß-TT individuals. The study was designed to evaluate the reliability of the diagnostic parameter HbA2 in the differentiation of ß-TT and non-ß-TT in Saudis. METHODS: The widely used high performance liquid chromatography (Variant II Bio-Rad) was used to measure HbA2 levels in blood. Sanger sequencing was used to screen the variation in globin genes (HBB, HBD, HBA1, and HBA2). All the study subjects were divided into ßTT and non-ßTT (wild) categories based on the presence or absence of HBB variations and further sub-divided into false positive, true positive, false negative, and true negative, based on HbA2 values. RESULTS: Out of 288 samples, 96 had HBB gene mutations. Of the 96 ß-TT samples, sickle cell trait (SCT) samples (n = 58) were excluded, while the remaining (38 ß-TT) were included in the detailed analysis: seven subjects with the HBB mutation had normal HbA2 (<3%), and three were borderline (3.1-3.9%). The remainder (n = 28) had an elevated HbA2 level (>4%). Based on HbA2 analysis alone, both these groups would be incorrectly diagnosed as normal. Similarly, of the 189 non-ß-TT samples, 179 had normal HbA2, eight had borderline HbA2, and two had a HbA2 level above 4%. Based on HbA2 analysis alone, borderline and >4% HbA2 individuals, negative for ß-TT, can be incorrectly diagnosed as carriers. CONCLUSION: Given the percentage of samples falling in the HbA2 "borderline" and "normal" categories, it can be concluded that HbA2 has a measure of unreliability in the diagnosis of ß-thalassemia carriers.