Association between social media use and the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination among the general population in Saudi Arabia - a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a worldwide global public health threat. Although acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination will be a critical step in combating the pandemic, achieving high uptake will be difficult, and potentially made more difficult by social media misinformation. This study aimed to examine the association between social media use and acceptance of receiving COVID-19 vaccine among the general population in Saudi Arabia. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted from June 17 to June 19, 2021 among 504 participants of the general population in Saudi Arabia. The data were collected using a three-part online questionnaire (sociodemographic characteristics, medical and vaccination history, pattern of social media use). RESULTS: Among 504 participants who completed the survey, 477 participants were acceptant of the vaccine and 27 were non-accepting. A total of 335 individuals had already received the vaccine, 142 were willing to receive the vaccine and 27 were unwilling. One hundred and thirty participants denied using social media for COVID-19 news. Four factors were found to be significant in influencing vaccine acceptance in univariate analysis: having a chronic condition (odds ratio (OR) = 0.367, P = 0.019), believing that infertility is a side effect of the COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 0.298, P = 0.009), being concerned about a serious side effect from the vaccine (somewhat concerned: OR = 0.294, P = 0.022, very concerned: OR = 0.017, P < 0.0001), and basing the decision to be vaccinated on social media information (OR = 0.260, P = 0.006). Two of these factors fell away on multivariate analysis: basing the decision on social media information (OR = 0.356, P = 0.071), and a belief that vaccination causes infertility (OR = 0.0333, P = 0.054), suggesting that the associations are dependent on other factors. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, there was no significant independent relationship between social media usage and people's willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Further studies to explore the association between social media use and vaccine decisions are required to generalize this observation to the Saudi population.

Intranasal ipratropium bromide for the common cold.

BACKGROUND: The common cold is one of the most common illnesses in humans and constitutes an economic burden both in terms of productivity and expenditure for treatment. There is no proven cure for the common cold and symptomatic relief is the mainstay of treatment. The use of intranasal ipratropium bromide (IB) has been addressed in several studies and might prove an effective treatment for the common cold. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of IB versus placebo or no treatment on severity of rhinorrhoea and nasal congestion in children and adults with the common cold. Subjective overall improvement was another primary outcome and side effects (for example, dry mucous membranes, epistaxis and systemic anticholinergic effects) were reported as a secondary outcome. SEARCH METHODS: In this updated review we searched CENTRAL 2013, Issue 3, MEDLINE (1950 to March week 4, 2013), MEDLINE in-process and other non-indexed citations (8 April 2013), EMBASE (1974 to April 2013), AMED (1985 to April 2013), Biosis (1974 to February 2011) and LILACS (1985 to April 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IB to placebo or no treatment in children and adults with the common cold. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We used a standardised form to extract relevant data and we contacted trial authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials with a total of 2144 participants were included. Four studies (1959 participants) addressed subjective change in severity of rhinorrhoea. All studies were consistent in reporting statistically significant changes in favour of IB. Nasal congestion was reported in four studies and was found to have no significant change between the two groups. Two studies found a positive response in the IB group for the global assessment of overall improvement. Side effects were more frequent in the IB group, odds ratio (OR) 2.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 3.11). Commonly encountered side effects included nasal dryness, blood tinged mucus and epistaxis. The overall risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For people with the common cold, the existing evidence, which has some limitations, suggests that IB is likely to be effective in ameliorating rhinorrhoea. IB had no effect on nasal congestion and its use was associated with more side effects compared to placebo or no treatment although these appeared to be well tolerated and self limiting. There is a need for larger, high-quality trials to determine the effectiveness of IB in relieving common cold symptoms.

Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Influence the Awareness About Vitamin D Among the General Population in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia?

Background Vitamin D deficiency has been a major health concern over the last decade. With the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health officials and social media have stressed the importance of vitamin D and its role in immune systems. This research focused on the level of vitamin D awareness in Jeddah after the pandemic in 2022. Methodology A cross-sectional study was conducted among the adult general population in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Data were obtained through an electronically distributed questionnaire designed to collect information on self-reported knowledge questions about vitamin D, which was previously validated and used in a similar study on the same population before the pandemic. The validated questionnaire included sociodemographic characteristics and questions assessing the knowledge about vitamin D. Ethical approvals were obtained from the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Results Of the 385 total participants, 198 (51.4%) were aged 18-28 years, 331 (86%) were of Arab ethnicity, 289 (75.1%) had a university degree, 86 (22.3%) had completed high school, 186 (48.3%) were married, and 197 (51.2%) had no children. The overall mean knowledge score was 67.12%, and the mean knowledge score for vitamin D benefits was 73.51%. The mean knowledge score for vitamin D sources was 51.53%, and the mean knowledge score for toxicity was 86.49%. When comparing knowledge scores based on demographic variables, only a few variables were significant. Regarding vitamin D awareness following the COVID-19 pandemic, most participants (54.55%) believed the pandemic had affected or increased their vitamin D awareness. Approximately 52.85% had used vitamin D supplements before the pandemic, and 53.25% were currently using vitamin D supplements. Conclusions In general, compared to pre-COVID-19 studies conducted in Saudi Arabia, this study revealed a greater understanding of vitamin D. Participants who had completed high school or more displayed a higher level of knowledge than other groups. It is still recommended that primary care physicians educate their patients and families about the benefits of vitamin D, the effects of its deficiency, and its toxicity.

Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake and Predictors Among Women in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

INTRODUCTION: Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers among females, contributing to significant mortality and morbidity worldwide. These numbers have significantly decreased since the implementation of cervical cancer screening. Despite that, screening in many countries, including Saudi Arabia, remains suboptimal. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted between May to November 2021 among 385 women aged 21-65 years who live in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The data were collected using a four-part online survey: demographic characteristics, cervical cancer screening status, predictors of undergoing cervical cancer screening, and barriers to screening. RESULTS: Among the 385 women who completed the survey, only around one-third (33.4%) had a Pap smear at some point in their lives. The factors that were found to be significantly associated with the screening status (having a Pap test) in the univariate analysis are increasing age, education level, monthly income, perceived risk of getting cervical cancer, source of information about Pap test, having a family doctor, recommendation by the family doctor to have a Pap test, undergoing a gynecological examination, visiting a gynecologist in the past, history of previous gynecological complaint, and history of abortion. In the multivariable analysis, only four factors were found to be significantly associated with the screening status: age, monthly income, undergoing a gynecological examination in the past, and the recommendation by the family doctor, which by far had the largest effect. CONCLUSION: Cervical cancer screening rate is relatively low in the city of Jeddah. The recommendation of a Pap test by the family doctor had the largest impact on screening status. These results support the important role of family physicians in promoting screening tests for preventive healthcare. The results also suggest the need for education programs to promote cervical cancer screening among women in Saudi Arabia.

Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccine and Associated Factors Among Pregnant Women in Saudi Arabia.

Background: Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) vaccination has been established as preventing severe and mortal COVID-19. Vaccination is critical strategy in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, to restrict infections and reduce disease severity. Vaccination coverage will be more extensive if we can better identify vaccination barriers in the population, especially among vulnerable groups, of which one is pregnant women. The aim of this study was to determine the level of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination and detect the factors that influence vaccine acceptance among pregnant women in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, web-based study conducted in Western, Eastern, North, South, and Central Regions in Saudi Arabia between July and September 2021 among pregnant women, using multi-stage sampling. All pregnant women above 18 years were invited to participate in the study. Pregnant under 18 years of age and those with a contraindication to receiving COVID-19 vaccination were excluded. Binomial logistic regression (univariate and multivariate) was used to identify the influencing factors on vaccination acceptance. Results: Among the 5307 pregnant women, the acceptance level of COVID-19 vaccine was 68%. In the multivariate regression model analysis, the most common predictors of acceptance were living in North Region (P = 0.001, OR = 1.9), living in South Region (P = 0.000, OR = 3.06), and living in Central Region (P = 0.035, OR = 1.42) in comparison to living in Western Region. Gestational week (P = 0.018, OR=0.98), income more than 8000 SR (P = 0.000, OR = 0.51), education level (primary, secondary, and university; P = 0.002, 0.008, and 0.010, respectively), having had gestational diabetes mellitus (P = 0.013, OR = 1.86), being vaccinated with influenza vaccine during present pregnancy (P = 0.000, OR = 4.55, OR = 1.81), being vaccinated with tetanus vaccine during present pregnancy (P = 0.039), and believing that the COVID-19 vaccine could harm their baby (P = 0.000, OR = 0.12). Conclusion: Our study reported high acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. The major two reasons for refusal were concerns about a lack of data on COVID-19 vaccination safety and the possibility of harming the fetus. Continued public health efforts, such as educational television programs and awareness campaigns about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women, are required to raise awareness. More studies of COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnant women would assist in overcoming these obstacles and encourage pregnant women to be vaccinated.

Intranasal ipratropium bromide for the common cold.

BACKGROUND: The common cold is one of the most common illnesses in humans and constitutes an economic burden both in terms of productivity and expenditure for treatment. There is no proven cure for the common cold and symptomatic relief is the mainstay of treatment. The use of intranasal ipratropium bromide (IB) has been addressed in several studies and might prove an effective treatment for the common cold. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of IB versus placebo or no treatment on severity of rhinorrhoea and nasal congestion in children and adults with the common cold. Subjective overall improvement was another primary outcome and side effects were reported as a secondary outcome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2011, Issue 1) which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1950 to January week 4, 2011), MEDLINE in-process and other non-indexed citations (February 2011), EMBASE (1974 to February 2011), AMED (1985 to February 2011), Biosis (1974 to February 2011) and LILACS (1985 to February 2011). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IB to placebo or no treatment in children and adults with the common cold. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We used a standardised form to extract relevant data and we contacted trial authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials with a total of 2144 participants were included. Four studies (1959 participants) addressed subjective change in severity of rhinorrhoea. All studies were consistent in reporting statistically significant changes in favour of IB. Nasal congestion was reported in four studies and was found to have no significant change between the two groups. Two studies found a positive response in the IB group for the global assessment of overall improvement. Side effects were more frequent in the IB group, odds ratio (OR) 2.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 3.11). Commonly encountered side effects included nasal dryness, blood tinged mucus and epistaxis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For people with the common cold, the existing evidence, which has some limitations, suggests that IB is likely to be effective in ameliorating rhinorrhoea. IB had no effect on nasal congestion and its use was associated with more side effects compared to placebo or no treatment although these appeared to be well-tolerated and self-limiting. There is a need for larger, high-quality trials to determine the effectiveness of IB in relieving common cold symptoms.