The Uptake of Pneumococcal and Seasonal Influenza Vaccinations Based on Perceptions and Attitudes Toward the COVID-19 Vaccine Among Patients With Diabetes.

Objective In this study, we aimed to assess the rates of pneumococcal and seasonal influenza vaccinations among elderly and nonelderly diabetes patients and examine their perceptions and attitudes toward the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. Methods A single-center study was conducted among patients with diabetes, employing a structured survey encompassing sociodemographic data, vaccination records, and the COVID-19 vaccine perception and attitude scale. Results Among the 280 diabetes patients in our study, the vaccination rates for COVID-19, seasonal influenza, and pneumococcal vaccines were 96.1%, 16.8%, and 17.5%, respectively. A higher cumulative dosage of the COVID-19 vaccine was associated with older age (r = 0.463; p<0.001), increased safety score (r = 0.479; p<0.001), and lower conspiracy theory score (r = -0.336; p<0.001). Participants who had received COVID-19 and influenza vaccines were observed to have significantly higher safety scores related to COVID-19 vaccines (p<0.001; d = 2.381 and p = 0.008; d = 0.525, respectively). Notably, vaccination rates for influenza and pneumococcus were significantly different between nonelderly and elderly patients (8.7% vs. 29.6%; p<0.001 and 13.4% vs. 24.1%; p = 0.022). Elderly patients with diabetes were 3.3 times more likely to receive the influenza vaccine than nonelderly participants [odds ratio (OR) = 3.319; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.592 - 6.920; p = 0.001] and had a higher safety score related to COVID-19 vaccines (OR = 1.076; 95% CI = 1.011 - 1.146; p = 0.021). Conclusions Both influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates were below the desired targets in this study. The vaccination rates among the nonelderly diabetes population suggest that this group may be more likely to neglect to receive vaccination compared to the elderly diabetes population. The association between vaccination rates and post-pandemic safety perceptions highlights the critical need to implement public health strategies specifically designed to address and improve safety-related information dissemination.

Comparison of the Oral Health-Related Quality of Life, Sleep Quality, and Oral Health Literacy in Sleep and Awake Bruxism: Results from Family Medicine Practice.

Objectives: Bruxism is a common oral behaviour. This study aimed to compare oral health-related quality of life, sleep quality, and oral health literacy in patients with and without possible sleep bruxism (SB) and awake bruxism (AB). Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study including 249 volunteers was conducted in a family medicine clinic of a tertiary hospital in Istanbul, Turkey. The American Sleep Medicine Association Bruxism Diagnostic Criteria, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) tool, Decay Missing Filled Total Teeth (DMFT) score, and Health Literacy Dental Scale-Short Form (HeLD-14) were assessed by face-to-face interviews. Data were examined using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests, Spearman correlation, and logistic regression analysis. Results: The presence of SB and AB was detected as 41.4% and 21.7%, respectively, among 91 males and 158 females, with a mean age of 36.64 ± 11.60 years. Sleep and awake bruxers had a lower oral health-related quality of life (odds ratio (OR): 0.816, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.770-0.864 and OR: 0.923, 95% CI = 0.956-0.982, respectively). Poor sleep quality was detected 1.28 times higher in sleep bruxism (OR: 1.277, 95% CI = 1.152-1.415) and 1.14 times higher in awake bruxism (OR: 1.141, 95% CI = 1.230-1.058). The DMFT score was found to be 1.13 times higher in SB (OR: 1.129, 95% CI = 1.043-1.223). A higher HeLD-14 score was associated with a lower DMFT score (p < 0.001; r = -0.240). The oral health literacy score was lower in AB and SB groups than in patients without bruxism, but it was not statistically significant (p = 0.267, p = 0.376). Conclusion: A lower oral health-related quality of life and poor sleep quality would be expected in the presence of SB or AB. However, patients may not be aware of it unless asked by a physician regardless of oral health literacy level.

Screening of Hepatitis A and B Seropositivity among Turkish Healthcare Providers Admitted to Occupational Health Services.

This study aimed to determine the protection rates against hepatitis A virus (HAV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV), among healthcare providers (HCPs). The occupational health service data of Gaziosmanpasa Training and Research Hospital between January 2020 and December 2020 were evaluated for this retrospective observational study. Of the 1,722 participants aged 34.40 ± 9.16 years, 48.6% (n = 861) were male, and 55.0% (n = 975) were doctors and nurses. The anti-HBs seropositivity rate was 87.5% (n = 1,501). None of the participants had anti-HCV antibodies. Twelve participants were HBsAg positive. A level of anti-HBs titer ≥10 mIU/mL was maintained in 66.7% of the HCPs vaccinated in childhood, while 71.3% (n = 1,263) of the participants had anti-HAV IgG. HAV vaccination needs were higher in the doctor and nurse groups than in the other groups (60.5% and 39.5%, respectively, p = 0.003). HBV protection was higher among HCPs in polyclinics/wards and surgery/intensive care units than in those working in the emergency department (odds ratio (OR): 2.099, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.285-3.429; OR: 1.592, 95% CI = 1.037-2.443, respectively). HAV protection was higher in HCPs aged 31-50 years and over 50 years than in those aged 18-30 years (OR: 2.046, 95% CI = 1.647-2.541; OR: 3.615, 95% CI = 2.164-6.037, respectively). In this study, one out of every two HCPs aged 18-30 years admitted to the occupational health control services had not yet received the HAV vaccine. The low levels of HBV protection among HCPs in the emergency department highlight the need for occupational health screening and HBV vaccination for HCPs working in emergency services in hospitals.