Emergence of novel human coronavirus: public health implications in the Eastern Mediterranean Region

Healthcare policies, precautionary measures and outcomes of mass gathering events in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: Expedited review

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020, several countries suspended or restricted mass gathering (MG) events to mitigate the risk of superspreading events. Prohibiting MGs aimed to lessen the likelihood of highly infectious persons coming into close contact with many others. Now that the world has opened its doors wide and removed most of precautionary measures, many questions arise. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current evidence regarding the policies and regulations that were implemented for the safe return of MG events. Besides, we highlighted the impact of the return of MG events during 2021 on the trajectory of COVID-19 spread. Canceling MG events can carry religious, societal, economic, and public negative consequences necessitating the safe return of these events. The experience with the COVID-19 pandemic was the foundation for the recommendations for the safe conduction of MG events during the pandemic by international public health bodies. When policymakers adequately applied precautionary measures and strategic approaches, we witnessed the safe holding of huge MG events without aggravating the COVID-19 situation or increasing the number of new cases beyond the capacity and readiness of the national healthcare system.

Knowledge and practices of primary health care physicians regarding updated guidelines of MERS-CoV infection in Abha city

Background:

Human coronaviruses (hCoV) usually cause mild to moderate upper respiratory tract illnesses. The novel coronavirus (nCoV), or Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), is a particular strain different from any other known hCoV with the possibility of human and also zoonotic transmissions. The aim of the study to assess primary health care (PHC) physicians’ knowledge and adherence regarding Saudi Ministry of Health guidelines regarding MERS-CoV.

Materials and Methods:

A cross-sectional study design was followed to include 85 PHC physicians in Abha city. An interview questionnaire has been designed by the researcher that was used to assess knowledge and practices of PHC physicians regarding diagnosis and management of MERS-CoV. It includes personal characteristics, the MERS-CoV knowledge assessment questionnaire, and practices related to adherence toward guidelines regarding MERS-CoV.

Results:

PHC physicians’ knowledge gaps regarding MERS-CoV included protected exposure (32.9%), highest seasonal incidence of MERS-CoV in Saudi Arabia (60%), relation between incidence of MERS-CoV and overcrowding (62.4%), case fatality of MERS-CoV cases (63.5%), and collecting specimens from MERS-CoV patients (64.7%). The knowledge of PHC physicians about MERS-CoV was poor among 5.9%, good among 63.5%, and excellent among 30.6%. Personal protective equipment to be used when seeing suspected cases of MERS-CoV infection were mainly the mask (94.1%), gloves (78.8%), the gown (60%), goggles (31.8%), and the cap (22.4%). All participants stated that the most important standard precaution that should be applied when seeing a case of MERS-CoV infection is hand washing, whereas 97.6% stated that the most important respiratory precaution to prevent transmission of respiratory infections in PHC setting when seeing a case of MERS-CoV infection is masking and separation of suspected MERS-CoV patients, and 81.2% stated that upon exit from the room of a MERS-CoV patient, the physician should remove and discard personal protective equipment. PHC physicians’ knowledge about MERS-CoV differed significantly according to their nationality (P = 0.038), with non-Saudi physicians expressing higher percent of excellent knowledge than Saudi physicians (40% and 20%, respectively). Those who attended continuing medical education (CME) activities had significantly higher percent of excellent knowledge than those who did not attend a CME activity (55.6% and 23.9%, respectively, P = 0.011). PHC physicians’ knowledge did not differ significantly according to their age, gender, qualification, experience in PHC, and practice-related adherence to guidelines. PHC physicians’ practice-related adherence to guidelines about MERS-CoV differed significantly according to their position (P = 0.035), with specialists having the highest percent of excellent practice (13%).

Conclusions:

There are knowledge gaps among PHC physicians in Abha city, and their practice is suboptimal regarding MERS-CoV infection. Less than one-fourth of PHC physicians attend CME activities about MERS-CoV infection. However, significantly less practice-related adherence to guidelines are associated with Saudi PHC physicians, those who did not attend a related CME activity, and MBBS qualified physicians’ general practitioners. To increase awareness, more CME activities related to MERS-CoV infection management needs to be organized.