Hesitance and Misconceptions about the Annual Influenza Vaccine among the Saudi Population Post-COVID-19.

(1) Background: Vaccination is a cornerstone of public health strategy for mitigating the morbidity and mortality associated with seasonal influenza. However, vaccine hesitancy and misconceptions pose significant barriers to this effort, particularly in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aimed to investigate the transfer of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy to the influenza vaccine and to identify misconceptions about the influenza vaccine among the Saudi population in the post-COVID-19 era. (2) Methods: A web-based, cross-sectional study was conducted between February and June 2023 using a questionnaire adapted from the Adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (aVHS). The questionnaire was disseminated to 589 Saudi residents, aged 18 and above, with access to digital devices. Data were analyzed via logistic regression analysis to determine the associations between vaccine hesitancy, knowledge of influenza, and baseline characteristics. (3) Results: This study found that 37.7% of respondents exhibited vaccine hesitancy, while 56.7% demonstrated good knowledge about influenza. There was a significant relationship between nationality and vaccine hesitancy (p-value > 0.05), with non-Saudi respondents exhibiting higher hesitancy. Logistic regression analysis revealed significant associations between vaccine hesitancy, age, and nationality. Meanwhile, participants with higher educational qualifications showed greater knowledge about influenza. (4) Conclusions: The findings highlight an important crossover of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy to influenza vaccines. This study underscores the need for targeted public health interventions to address misconceptions about the influenza vaccine, particularly among certain demographic groups, in order to improve influenza vaccine uptake in the post-COVID era.

Determinants of Z-Score of Bone Mineral Density among Premenopausal Saudi Females in Different Age Groups: A Cross Sectional Study.

This is a comparative multicenter cross-sectional study that evaluated the potential determinants of Z-scores among premenopausal Saudi women before and after the age of peak bone density. The Study concluded that for better BMD among premenopausal women, attention should be paid to early physical activity and healthy nutrition, especially vitamin D, during the childbearing period. OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential determinants of Z-scores among premenopausal Saudi females in different age groups before and after the expected age of peak bone density (PBD). METHODS: This multicenter comparative cross-sectional study was conducted in Madinah and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, between August 2021 and March 2022. We recruited 886 premenopausal females (605 (68.3%) below and 281 (31.7%) at or above the age of 30). The structured pre-coded Arabic questionnaire included sociodemographic data, a BMD questionnaire, menstrual history, an Arab Teen Lifestyle Study questionnaire, and food frequency data. Metabolic Equivalents (METs) were calculated from physical activity. Analysis of serum PTH, 25(OH) vitamin D (VD) was performed with chemiluminescent immunoassay. BMD was measured with a calcaneal qualitative ultrasound. RESULTS: Most women had age-matched Z-scores, with very few (24 (2.7%)) being non-age-matched with no identified secondary causes. Significant Z-score determinants before PBD were BMI (OR: 0.167, p = 0.003) and total METs (OR: 0.160, p < 0.005). After the age of PBD, significant predictors were parity (OR: 0.340, p = 0.042), history of vitamin D deficiency (OR: 0.352, p = 0.048), and BMI (OR: 0.497, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Early determinants of Z-scores among premenopausal women were the nutritional status and physical activity. After the age of PBD, parity and vitamin D status offer additional determinants. For better BMD, attention should be paid to early physical activity and healthy nutrition, especially for vitamin D, with intensification of efforts during the childbearing period.

Association Between Vitamin D Level and Z-Score Changes of Bone Density in College-Age Saudi Girls: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Objective: Vitamin D (VD) deficiency is a worldwide health problem. VD plays a crucial role in calcium homeostasis, phosphorus metabolism and bone health. Still much remain to understand the effect of VD deficiency on bone mass. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between VD levels and bone mass density (BMD) among college-age Saudi females. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, 460 females with a median age of 21 years, were enrolled, completed a comprehensive, structured questionnaire which was validated by experienced endocrinologist, a dietician, and a statistician. Body mass indexes (BMI) were calculated, and BMD was estimated through quantitative ultrasound to ankle. Serum VD, calcium, phosphate, parathyroid hormone, and alkaline phosphatase were measured using chemiluminescent immunoassay technique. Results: VD deficiency reached up to 83.3% (66.9% insufficiency and 16.4% deficiency). Lower than normal BMD was detected in 18.3% of subjects, with only 1.1% having a non-age-matched high risk for osteoporosis. The significant independent predictors of Z-score were age of menarche, menstrual irregularities, dairy products consumption, physical activity, BMI, alkaline phosphatase, and history of previous VD supplementation. Conclusion: VD deficiency and low BMD are highly prevalent among college-age Saudi females. Low BMD is not linked to serum level of VD but to its previous use as a supplementation. Early lifestyle changes, attention to gynecological problems, and prevention of VD deficiency are all needed to support BMD among these girls.

Utilization of Antibiotics for Hospitalized Patients with Severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Al-Madinah Al-Munawara, Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Study.

Background: Most patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) with severe Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia receive antibacterial antibiotics with little evidence of bacterial infections. Objective: This study was designed to review the profiles of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care, the rate of bacterial coinfection, the antibiotics used, and their relation to patient outcomes (death or recovery). Methods: This was a retrospective study that reviewed the medical records of all patients with confirmed COVID-19 (n = 120) severe pneumonia admitted directly from the emergency room to the intensive care unit, at a public hospital during the period from May 2020 to April 2021. The data collected included patients' demographic and laboratory data, comorbidities, antibiotic treatment, and their outcome. Descriptive statistics, bivariate inferential analysis tests (chi-square and unpaired T-Tests) and multivariable binary logistic regression were performed. Results: The mean age of the patients was 56.8 ± 16.5 years old, and among them, 74 (62.7%) were males. Of the included patients, 92 (77.0%) had comorbidities, 76 (63.3%) required mechanical ventilation and 30 (25%) died. All patients received empirical antibiotics for suspected bacterial coinfection. The most common antibiotics used were azithromycin (n = 97, 8%) and imipenem (n = 83, 9%). Ninety patients (75%) were on two empirical antibiotics. Early positive cultures for pathogens were found only in four patients (3.3%), whereas 36 (30%) patients had positive cultures 5-10 days after admission. The most frequently isolated pathogens were Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 16) and coagulase-negative Staphylococci (n = 14). In bivariate analysis empirical treatment with azithromycin resulted in a significantly lower mortality rate (p = 0.023), meanwhile mechanical ventilation, days of stay in intensive care unit, morbidities (e.g., lung disease), linezolid and, vancomycin use associated with mortality (p< 0.05). The adjusted logistic regression, controlling for age and gender, revealed that azithromycin antibiotic was more likely protective from mortality (OR= 0.22, 95%CI 0.06-0.85, p=0.028. However, patients with lung diseases and under mechanical ventilation were 35.21 and 19.57 more likely to die (95%CI =2.84-436.70, p=0.006; 95%CI=2.66-143.85, p=0.003, respectively). Conclusion: Bacterial coinfection with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring intensive care was unlikely. The benefit of Azithromycin over other antibiotics could be attributed to its anti-inflammatory properties rather than its antibacterial effect.