SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 UK Variant of Concern Lineage-Related Perceptions, COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Travel Worry Among Healthcare Workers

Exploring Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance, Uptake, and Hesitancy in the Pediatric Population: A Study of Parents and Caregivers in Saudi Arabia during the Initial Vaccination Phase

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess COVID-19 vaccine acceptance, uptake, and hesitancy among parents and caregivers of children in Saudi Arabia during the initial rollout of pediatric COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

An electronic survey was used to collect data from participants who visited a COVID-19 vaccine center. The survey included demographic data, COVID-19 vaccine status among participants and their children, and reasons for vaccine acceptance or rejection. The Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) tool was also employed to assess vaccine hesitancy and attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and routine childhood vaccination. Multivariate binary regression analysis was used to identify predictors of actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake among children.

RESULTS

Of the 873 respondents included in the analysis, 61.5% were parents and 38.5% were other caregivers. Of the participants, 96.9% had received the COVID-19 vaccine. Six hundred and ninety-four participants accepted the vaccine for their children, with the main reasons being an endorsement by the Saudi Ministry of Health (60%) and the importance of going back to school (55%). One hundred and seventy-nine participants would not vaccinate their children, with the most common reasons being fear of adverse effects (49%) and inadequate data about vaccine safety (48%). Factors such as age, COVID-19 vaccination status, self-rated family commitment level, attitudes toward routine children's vaccines, and participants' generalized anxiety disorder (GAD7) score did not significantly correlate with children's COVID-19 vaccination status. Parents were less likely to vaccinate their children compared to other caregivers, and participants with a higher socioeconomic status were more likely to vaccinate their children.

CONCLUSION

Vaccine acceptance and uptake were high during the initial pediatric COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Saudi Arabia. Still, the ongoing endorsement of the Ministry of Health and healthcare authorities should continue to advocate for better vaccine uptake in children.

Mpox Perceptions and Vaccine Advocacy among the Healthcare Workers of Solid Organ Transplant Centers: A Multicenter, Cross-Sectional Survey in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

In response to the global Mpox outbreaks, this survey aimed to assess the knowledge, perceptions, and advocacy of Mpox vaccines among solid organ transplant healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among solid organ transplant HCWs in Saudi Arabia from 15 August to 5 September 2022. A total of 199 responses were received from participants primarily working in the kidney (54.8%) and liver (14.6%) transplant units.

RESULTS

The survey found that most participants were aware of the 2022 Mpox outbreak, but the majority were more concerned about COVID-19 than Mpox. While the majority of participants thought laboratory personnel and HCWs in direct contact with Mpox patients should receive the vaccine, less than 60% believed that all HCWs should be vaccinated. Additionally, over half of the participants lacked knowledge of animal-human transmission of the virus.

CONCLUSION

The results highlight the need for increased education on Mpox among transplant HCWs in Saudi Arabia, particularly regarding the virus's transmission dynamics and vaccines. This education is crucial to improve HCWs' understanding of this emerging disease, especially given their vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Monkeypox Disease (MPOX) Perceptions among Healthcare Workers versus General Population during the First Month of the WHO Alert: Cross-Sectional Survey in Saudi Arabia

Background: Monkeypox disease (MPOX) recently re-emerged in May 2022, causing international outbreaks in multiple non-endemic countries. This study demonstrates a novel comparison between the knowledge and perceptions of Saudi healthcare workers (HCWs) and the general public regarding MPOX. Methods: An online survey, conducted from 27 May to 5 June 2022, assessing participants' MPOX and monkeypox virus (MPV) knowledge in terms of transmission, vaccination, isolation precautions, and their attitudes toward seeking more information. Results: A total of 1546 members of the public and 1130 HCWs completed the survey. Briefly, 61.3% of the public and 74.2% of HCWs showed interest in seeking more information about MPOX. Both groups had average overall mean MPOX knowledge scores. Members of the public holding university degrees and those showing high levels of worry regarding MPOX had significantly higher knowledge scores. However, HCWs showed a poor vaccination knowledge score, while only 57% recognized that MPOX can present similarly to COVID-19 in the early stages. Female HCWs and those with high self-rated MPOX awareness had significantly high knowledge scores. HCWs in secondary and tertiary centers had significantly higher knowledge scores. Conclusion: Both groups showed a decent attitude in terms of seeking more MPOX knowledge, which correlated positively with their worry about and awareness of the disease. These observations are mostly as a consequence of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, which encouraged the public and HCW to acquire more information about any novel emerging disease. Policymakers should make the most of this attitude in their awareness campaigns to prevent the spread of the disease and encourage vaccination in cases where it is needed. The knowledge gaps among HCWs were most evident in terms of clinical presentation and vaccinations; this problem needs addressing if we are to avoid further emerging MPOX cases.

Psychological impact on healthcare workers, general population and affected individuals of SARS and COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Any infectious disease outbreak may lead to a negative detrimental psychological impact on individuals and the community at large, however; there was no systematic review nor meta-analysis that examined the relationship between the psychological/mental health impact of SARS and COVID-19 outbreak in Asia.

METHODS AND DESIGN

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases from 1/1/2000 to 1/6/2020. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we analyzed the psychological impact on confirmed/suspected cases, healthcare workers and the general public during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak and Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemics. Primary outcomes included prevalence of depression, anxiety, stress, post-traumatic stress disorder, aggression, sleeping problems and psychological symptoms.

RESULT

Twenty-three eligible studies (N = 27,325) were included. Random effect model was used to analyze the data using STATA. Of these studies, 11 were related to the SARS outbreak and 12 related to COVID-19 outbreaks. The overall prevalence rate of anxiety during SARS and COVID-19 was 37.8% (95% CI: 21.1-54.5, P < 0.001, I2 = 96.9%) and 34.8% (95% CI: 29.1-40.4), respectively. For depression, the overall prevalence rate during SARS and COVID-19 was 30.9% (95% CI: 18.6-43.1, P < 0.001, I2 = 97.3%) and 32.4% (95% CI: 19.8-45.0, P < 0.001, I2 = 99.8%), respectively. The overall prevalence rate of stress was 9.4% (95% CI: -0.4 -19.2, P = 0.015, I2 = 83.3%) and 54.1% (95% CI: 35.7-72.6, P < 0.001, I2 = 98.8%) during SARS and COVID-19, respectively. The overall prevalence of PTSD was 15.1% (95% CI: 8.2-22.0, P < 0.001) during SARS epidemic, calculated by random-effects model (P < 0.05), with significant between-study heterogeneity (I2 = 93.5%).

CONCLUSION

The SARS and COVID-19 epidemics have brought about high levels of psychological distress to individuals. Psychological interventions and contingent digital mental health platform should be promptly established nationwide for continuous surveillance of the increasing prevalence of negative psychological symptoms. Health policymakers and mental health experts should jointly collaborate to provide timely, contingent mental health treatment and psychological support to those in need to reduce the global disease burden.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

CRD42020182787, identifier PROSPER.

Monkeypox caused less worry than COVID-19 among the general population during the first month of the WHO Monkeypox alert: Experience from Saudi Arabia

Background

Monkeypox re-emerged in May 2022 as another global health threat. This study assessed the public's perception, worries, and vaccine acceptance for Monkeypox and COVID-19 during the first month of WHO announcement.

Methods

A large-scale, cross-sectional survey was conducted between May 27 and June 5, 2022, in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected on sociodemographic characteristics, previous infection with COVID-19, worry levels regarding Monkeypox compared to COVID-19, awareness, and perceptions of Monkeypox, and vaccine acceptance.

Results

Among the 1546 participants, most respondents (62%) were more worried about COVID-19 than Monkeypox. Respondents aged 45 years and above and those with a university degree or higher had lower odds of agreement with Monkeypox vaccination (OR 0.871, p-value 0.006, OR 0.719, p-value <0.001), respectively. Respondents with moderate to a high level of self and family commitment to infection control precautionary measures and those who expressed self and family worry of Monkeypox infection had significantly higher odds of vaccination agreement (OR 1.089 p-value = 0.047, OR1.395 p-value = 0.003) respectively. On the other hand, respondents who previously developed COVID-19 were significantly more worried about the Monkeypox disease (1.30 times more, p-value = 0.020).

Conclusion

Worry levels amongst the public are higher from COVID-19 than Monkeypox. Perception of Monkeypox as a dangerous and virulent disease, worry from contracting the disease, and high commitment to infection precautionary measures were predictors of agreement with Monkeypox vaccination. While advanced age and high education level are predictors of low agreement with vaccination.

Healthcare Workers’ Worries and Monkeypox Vaccine Advocacy during the First Month of the WHO Monkeypox Alert: Cross-Sectional Survey in Saudi Arabia

Background: Monkeypox virus re-surged in May 2022 as a new potential global health threat, with outbreaks bursting in multiple countries across different continents. This study was conducted in Saudi Arabia during the first month following the WHO announcement of the Monkeypox outbreak, to assess healthcare workers (HCWs) perceptions of, worries concerning, and vaccine acceptance for, Monkeypox, in light of the resolving COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A national cross-sectional survey was conducted between 27 May and 10 June 2022, in Saudi Arabia. Data were collected on: HCWs’ sociodemographic and job-related characteristics; COVID-19 infection status; and worries concerning Monkeypox, compared to COVID-19 and its sources; as well as their perceptions and awareness of, and advocacy for, supporting Monkeypox vaccination. Results: A total of 1130 HCWs completed the survey, of which 41.6% have already developed COVID-19. However, 56.5% were more concerned about COVID-19 compared to Monkeypox, while the rest were more worried about Monkeypox disease. The main cause for concern among 68.8% of the participants was the development of another worldwide pandemic, post-COVID-19, followed by their concern of either themselves or their families contracting the infection (49.6%). Most HCWs (60%) rated their level of self-awareness of Monkeypox disease as moderate to high. Males, and those who had previously developed COVID-19, were significantly less likely to worry about Monkeypox. The worry about Monkeypox developing into a pandemic, and the perception of Monkeypox being a severe disease, correlated significantly positively with the odds of high worry concerning the disease. The major predictors of participants’ advocacy for vaccination against Monkeypox disease were: those who had developed COVID-19 previously; and those who supported tighter infection control measures (than those currently used) to combat the disease. A total of 74.2% of the surveyed HCWs perceived that they needed to read more about Monkeypox disease. Conclusions: Approximately half of the HCWs in this study were more concerned about Monkeypox disease than COVID-19, particularly regarding its possible progression into a new pandemic, during the first month following the WHO’s Monkeypox international alert. In addition, the majority of participants were in favor of applying tighter infection prevention measures to combat the disease. The current study highlights areas requiring attention for healthcare administrators regarding HCWs’ perceptions and preparedness for Monkeypox, especially in the event of a local or international pandemic.

Parental perceptions and the 5C psychological antecedents of COVID-19 vaccination during the first month of omicron variant surge: A large-scale cross-sectional survey in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

With the rapid surge of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, we aimed to assess parents' perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccines and the psychological antecedents of vaccinations during the first month of the Omicron spread.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey in Saudi Arabia was conducted (December 20, 2021-January 7, 2022). Convenience sampling was used to invite participants through several social media platforms, including WhatsApp, Twitter, and email lists. We utilized the validated 5C Scale, which evaluates five psychological factors influencing vaccination intention and behavior: confidence, complacency, constraints, calculation, and collective responsibility.

RESULTS

Of the 1,340 respondents, 61.3% received two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, while 35% received an additional booster dose. Fify four percentage were unwilling to vaccinate their children aged 5-11, and 57.2% were unwilling to give the additional booster vaccine to children aged 12-18. Respondents had higher scores on the construct of collective responsibility, followed by calculation, confidence, complacency, and finally constraints. Confidence in vaccines was associated with willingness to vaccinate children and positively correlated with collective responsibility (p < 0.010). Complacency about COVID-19 was associated with unwillingness to vaccinate older children (12-18 years) and with increased constraints and calculation scores (p < 0.010). While increasing constraints scores did not correlate with decreased willingness to vaccinate children (p = 0.140), they did correlate negatively with confidence and collective responsibility (p < 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrate the relationship between the five antecedents of vaccination, the importance of confidence in vaccines, and a sense of collective responsibility in parents' intention to vaccinate their children. Campaigns addressing constraints and collective responsibility could help influence the public's vaccination behavior.

Perspective on the challenges of COVID-19 facing healthcare workers

The emergence of COVID-19 has caused a significant impact on healthcare workers (HCWs) across the globe. A few of these challenges include high workload, lack of coordination and direction, changing information, shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE), managing isolation, fear, and increased anxiety, adapting to changes in healthcare practice and policy, coping strategies, and emotional and physical needs. Here, we shed light on some aspects of these challenges among healthcare workers.

SARS-CoV-2 variants and the global pandemic challenged by vaccine uptake during the emergence of the Delta variant: A national survey seeking vaccine hesitancy causes

BACKGROUND

Herd immunity for COVID-19 is the ultimate goal to end the pandemic. Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants has been a subject of considerable debate regarding vaccines effectiveness. This ongoing discussion and other evolving variables contribute to the hesitancy toward vaccines and levels of vaccination acceptance among both the healthcare workers and the public. This study was conducted to assess COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among the Saudi Arabian population during the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant.

METHODS

A national cross-sectional survey conducted between June 28 and July 5, 2021. The survey collected sociodemographic information, personal and family history of previous COVID-19 infection, adherence to precautionary measures, COVID-19 vaccination status, parental willingness to vaccinate their teenage children, and address variable associated with hesitancy to receive vaccination.

RESULTS

Among the 4071 participants, 67 % were women, 86 % of the participants received COVID-19 vaccine, 70 % had very high or high commitment with COVID-19 precautionary measures. On multivariate analysis, vaccine hesitancy was less likely in men (OR 0.652, p-value < 0.001), those who had direct family members infected with COVID-19 (OR 0.455, p-value < 0.001), and those who reported using the Ministry of Health official channels as information sources (OR 0.522, p-value < 0.001), while those younger than 44 years had higher hesitancy to receive the vaccine (1.5-2.1 times). Of the participants, only 42 % showed willingness to vaccinate their teenage (12-18 years old) children.

CONCLUSIONS

The participants in this study had high COVID-19 vaccination rate; however, hesitancy was reported more commonly among women. Their willingness to vaccinate their teenage children was much lower. Participants relying on social media platforms were highly hesitant to receive vaccination. Public health officials should scale up their efforts targeting females, young population, and parents by vaccination awareness campaigns, and refute misinformation spread on social media, especially with the emergence of variants and the news burst that coincide with them.

Implication of the emergence of the delta (B.1.617.2) variants on vaccine effectiveness

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 vaccines have been developed to compact the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and have been administered to people all over the world. These vaccines have been quite effective in reducing the possibility of severe illness, hospitalization and death. However, the recent emergence of Variants of Concern specifically the delta variant, B.1.617.2, had resulted in additional waves of the pandemic.

METHODS

We aim to review the literature to understand the transmission and disease severity, and determine the efficacy of the current COVID-19 vaccines. We searched Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase till August 4th 2021, and used the search terms "delta variant", "vaccinations"," breakthrough infections", and "neutralizing antibody". For the meta-analysis, 21 studies were screened in particular and five articles (148,071 cases) were included in the study, and only four were analyzed in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In this review, both in vitro and in vivo studies showed significant reductions in neutralization rates against delta variants for vaccinated individuals and convalescent patients with prior history of COVID-19. However, There was a lower incidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 due to Delta variant was found after the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-AstraZeneca and Moderna vaccines.

CONCLUSION

In fully vaccinated individuals, symptomatic infection with the delta variant was significantly reduced, and therefore, vaccinations play an important role to assist the fight against delta variant.

In-Person Schooling Amidst Children’s COVID-19 Vaccination: Exploring Parental Perceptions Just after Omicron Variant Announcement

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron spread fast globally and became the predominant variant in many countries. Resumption of public regular life activities, including in-person schooling, presented parents with new sources of worry. Thus, it is important to study parental worry about the Omicron variant, willingness to vaccinate their children, and knowledge about school-based COVID-19 precautionary measures. Methods: A national, cross-sectional, pilot-validated online questionnaire targeting parents in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was distributed between 31 December 2021, and 7 January 2022. The survey included sociodemographic, COVID-19 infection data, parental and children vaccination status, attitudes towards booster vaccine, parents’ Omicron-related perceptions and worries, and attitude towards in-person schooling. Results: A total of 1340 participants completed the survey, most (65.3%) of whom were mothers. Of the parents, 96.3% either received two or three doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only 32.1% of the parents were willing to vaccinate their young children (5–11 years of age). In relation to their children 12–18 years of age, 48% had already had them vaccinated, 31% were planning to vaccinate them, and 42.8% were willing to administer a booster dose. Only 16% were more worried about the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. Residents of western KSA were more worried about Omicron compared to Delta. Parents worried about the Omicron variant and male participants were significantly less aware of school-based COVID-19 precautionary measures. Parents with post-graduate degrees and those having more children were significantly more inclined to send their children to school even if COVID-19 outbreaks could occur in schools, while parents who were more worried about the Omicron variant and were more committed to infection prevention measures were significantly less inclined to do so. Conclusions: Overall, parents had lower worry levels about the Omicron variant compared to the Delta variant. They had a higher willingness to vaccinate their older children compared to the younger ones. In addition, our cohort of parents showed high willingness to send their children to schools and trusted the school-based preventative measures. These findings can inform policy makers when considering school related decisions during the current or future public health crises.

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant: Exploring Healthcare Workers' Awareness and Perception of Vaccine Effectiveness: A National Survey During the First Week of WHO Variant Alert

Background

As the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant spreads in several countries, healthcare workers' (HCWs) perceptions and worries regarding vaccine effectiveness and boosters warrant reassessment.

Methods

An online questionnaire among HCWs in Saudi Arabia (KSA) was distributed from Dec 1st-6th 2021 to assess their perceptions, vaccine advocacy to the Omicron variant, and their perception of the effectiveness of infection prevention measures and vaccination to prevent its spread, their Omicron variant related worries in comparison to the other variants, and their agreement with mandatory vaccination in general for adults.

Results

Among the 1,285 HCW participants, two-thirds were female, 49.8 % were nurses, 46.4% were physicians, and 50.0% worked in tertiary care hospitals. 66.9% considered vaccination to be the most effective way to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant and future variants. The respondents however perceived social distancing (78.0%), universal masking (77.8%), and avoiding unnecessary travel (71.4%) as slightly superior to vaccination to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants. HCWs aging 55 or older agreed significantly with vaccine ineffectiveness to control Omicron spread, while those who believed in non-pharmacological infection prevention measures agreed significantly with vaccination for that purpose. Male HCWs had a significant agreement with mandatory vaccination of all eligible adult populations. On the other hand, unwilling HCWs to receive the vaccine had strong disagreements with mandatory vaccination.

Conclusions

The current study in the first week of Omicron showed that only two-thirds of HCWs felt that vaccination was the best option to prevent the spread of the Omicron variant, indicating the need for further motivation campaigns for vaccination and booster dose. HCWs had a strong belief in infection prevention measures to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants that should be encouraged and augmented.

Post-COVID-19 syndrome: assessment of short- and long-term post-recovery symptoms in recovered cases in Saudi Arabia

Introduction

Recent studies investigated the endurance of symptoms and occurrence of complications three months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study aims to examine the prevalence, variation, and severity of continual symptoms in the post‐COVID-19 using a single-center questionnaire.

Methods

The questionnaire was distributed among population in Saudi Arabia who recovered from COVID‐19 between April 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021.

Results

A total of 744 participants completed the questionnaire, 318 (42.8%) recovered less than 3 months, 75 (10.1%) recovered 3–6 months, while 351 (47.2%) recovered more than 6 months. About half of the participants 353 (47.5%) had incessant symptoms and of those patients, more than half had two or more symptoms. Common symptoms included fatigue 189 (25.4%), headache 118 (15.9%), and myalgia 63 (8.5%). Of the participants, 189 (21.4%) experienced continual symptoms including anxiety in 98 (13.2%) and depression in 70 (9.5%).

Conclusion

The current study showed a high proportion of individuals with long-COVID-19 symptoms. Thus, proper assessment of the individuals in the post-recovery period can guide the patients to the relevant clinics for rehabilitation. Moreover, there is a great importance to decrease COVID-19 infection, populations should be targeted to boost vaccine efficiency.

Healthcare Workers' SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Uncertainty-Related Stress, Resilience, and Coping Strategies during the First Week of the World Health Organization's Alert

BACKGROUND

As the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant emerged and spread globally at an alarming speed, healthcare workers' (HCWs) uncertainties, worries, resilience, and coping strategies warranted assessment. The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe psychological impact on HCWs, including the development of Post-Traumatic Stress symptoms. Specific subgroups of HCWs, such as front-line and female workers, were more prone to poor mental health outcomes and difficulties facing stress.

METHODS

The responses to an online questionnaire among HCWs in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) were collected from 1 December 2021 to 6 December 2021, aiming to assess their uncertainties, worries, resilience, and coping strategies regarding the Omicron variant. Three validated instruments were used to achieve the study's goals: the Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS), the Standard Stress Scale (SSS), and the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS)-Short Form.

RESULTS

The online survey was completed by 1285 HCWs. Females made up the majority of the participants (64%). A total of 1285 HCW's completed the online survey from all regions in KSA. Resilient coping scored by the BRCS was negatively and significantly correlated with stress as scored by the SSS (r = -0.313, p < 0.010). Moreover, intolerance of uncertainty scored by the IUS positively and significantly correlated with stress (r = 0.326, p < 0.010). Increased stress levels were linked to a considerable drop in resilient coping scores. Furthermore, being a Saudi HCW or a nurse was linked to a significant reduction in resilient coping ratings. Coping by following healthcare authorities' preventative instructions and using the WHO website as a source of information was linked to a considerable rise in resilient coping.

CONCLUSIONS

The negative association between resilient coping and stress was clearly shown, as well as how underlying intolerance of uncertainty is linked to higher stress among HCWs quickly following the development of a new infectious threat. The study provides early insights into developing and promoting coping strategies for emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Acceptability of COVID-19 Vaccine Among Hospital Employees in the Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics in the University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

COVID-19 vaccination has been in the spotlight for almost a year now, both within the scientific community and in the general population. The issue of healthcare workers' (HCWs) hesitancy is particularly salient, given that they are at the forefront of the fight against COVID-19. Not only could unvaccinated HCW spread the disease, but HCWs are also critical messengers in building confidence towards COVID-19 vaccines. The goal of this study was to examine the perception of COVID-19 risk and of its vaccine acceptance among employees (i.e., HCW plus administrative staff) in the Department of Paediatrics, Gynaecology and Obstetrics at the University Hospitals of Geneva, for the purpose of drawing lessons on the determinants of vaccination morale.

METHODS

We conducted an anonymous online survey comparing vaccination attitudes among vaccinated and unvaccinated workers in June 2021. It included questions on perception of COVID-19 risks and COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccination was not mandatory in our institution but was strongly recommended.

RESULTS

In June 2021, 66% of the 1,800 employees of our department had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccine by the time of the survey. Among the employees, 776 participated (43%) to the survey, and among them 684 (88%) had chosen to be vaccinated. Participants working for longer in a hospital, with a chronic disease and a household contact with chronic disease were more likely to be vaccinated. Doctors were twice as likely to be vaccinated than nurses. Among unvaccinated hospital employees, 48 (52%) responded that they would not change their mind. Further, 35 (38%) were not feeling in danger of contracting severe COVID-19, and 32 (35%) had fears about possible side effects of COVID-19 vaccines that they wanted to discuss with a specialist.

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that, while two-third of the employees had been vaccinated, quite many were still hesitant. The unvaccinated explained their choice by not feeling at risk of complicated COVID-19, and because of fear of possible side effects associated with the vaccine. Investments in COVID-19 vaccine education is a critical component for increasing vaccine acceptance among the unvaccinated.

Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms and Its Predictors Among Healthcare Workers Following COVID-19 Pandemic in Southern Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: COVID-19 causes immense psychological pressure on communities in addition to physical misery. There is currently a scarcity of data on the psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on Ethiopian healthcare workers (HCWs). Therefore, this study was aimed to assess the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and its predictors following COVID-19 pandemic among healthcare workers (HCWs) in southern Ethiopia. Methods: A hospital based cross-sectional study design was used among 387 randomly selected HCWs between September 25 and October 25, 2020 at four selected public hospitals in Sidama National Regional State, southern Ethiopia. Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) was used to collect data post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Logistic regression analyses with 95% CI were used to examine the relationship between independent and outcome variables. Result: The prevalence of PTSD symptoms was found in 56.8% of participants. Significant factors that increase risk of PTSD symptoms were being female (AOR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.19, 3.05), married (AOR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.12, 3.14) and nurses (AOR = 3.31, 95% CI = 1.66, 6.63). On the other hand, HCWs working other than emergency unit such as inpatients/wards (AOR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.24, 0.75), OPD (AOR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.24, 0.97) and other units (AOR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.25, 0.96) less likely to be affected by PTSD symptoms. Conclusion: The current study showed high levels of PTSD symptoms as psychological challenges for HCWs. Sex, age, marital status, type of profession and working environment were significant factors for PTSD symptoms in HCWs during the pandemic. HCWs require mental health support during and after the pandemic.

The race for a COVID-19 vaccine: where are we up to?

INTRODUCTION

A novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, has triggered a global pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in late 2019. In January 2020, the WHO declared this pandemic a public health emergency. This pandemic has already caused over 5.3 million deaths from more than 272 million infections. The development of a successful vaccine is an urgent global priority to halt the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and prevent further fatalities. Researchers are fast-tracking this process, and there have already been significant developments in preclinical and clinical phases in a relatively short period of time. Some vaccines have been approved either for emergency use or mass application in recent months.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, we provide a general understanding of the fast-tracked clinical trial procedures and highlight recent successes in preclinical and clinical trials to generate a clearer picture of the progress of COVID-19 vaccine development.

EXPERT OPINION

A good number of vaccines have been rolled out within a short period a feat unprecedented in medical history. However, the emergence of new variants over time has appeared as a new threat, and the number of infections and casualties is still on the rise and this is going to be an ongoing battle.

COVID-19 Delta Variant: Perceptions, Worries, and Vaccine-Booster Acceptability among Healthcare Workers

Background: As the COVID-19 Delta variant has spread across the globe, healthcare workers' (HCWs) knowledge, worries, and vaccine booster acceptance should be assessed. Methods: Online questionnaires aimed at HCWs in Saudi Arabia were distributed between 9 and 12 August 2021, aiming to evaluate HCWs' perceptions and worries about the Delta variant as well as their feelings about receiving a booster-vaccine. Results: A total of 1279 HCWs participated, with 51.1% being physicians and 41.7% nurses. 92.5% were aware of the emergence of the Delta variant. Still, only 28.7% were found to have sufficient knowledge of the variant, and their level of worry about it was higher than their level of worry about the Alpha variant (2.32/5 versus 1.79/5). The main information sources cited by the participants were social media (50.5%), while 30.5% used scientific journals. Overall, 55.3% were willing to receive a vaccine booster, while one third would have preferred to receive a new mRNA vaccine specifically developed for the Delta variant. Factors associated with vaccine booster acceptance were receiving both vaccination doses (p = 0.008), believing that the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine is effective against variants (p < 0.001), and agreement that mixing/matching vaccines is effective against variants (p < 0.001). Conclusions: A high percentage of HCWs were aware of the Delta variant, but only a small fraction had decent quality of knowledge about it. The participants exhibited high worry levels and showed a modest acceptance of receiving a vaccine booster dose. These results should encourage public health officials to scale up educational efforts to disseminate reliable information about the different variants and provide recommendations about receiving a vaccine booster. Further research on methods to alleviate HCWs' worries about emerging variants is warranted.

Parental Attitudes and Hesitancy About COVID-19 vs. Routine Childhood Vaccinations: A National Survey

Objectives: To quantify parental acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine and assess the vaccine hesitancy (VH) for COVID-19 vs. childhood vaccines.

Methods: Eight vaccine hesitancy scale (VHS) items, adopted from WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Immunization (SAGE), were used to assess VH for COVID-19 vaccine vs. routine childhood vaccines. We distributed the online survey to parents with the commence of the national childhood COVID-19 vaccination program in Saudi Arabia.

Results: Among 3,167 parents, 47.6% are decided to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. The most common reasons for refusal were inadequate safety information (69%) and worry about side effects (60.6%). Parents have a significantly greater positive attitudes toward children's routine vaccines vs. the COVID-19 vaccine, with higher mean VHS (±SD) = 2.98 ± 0.58 vs. 2.63 ± 0.73, respectively (p-value < 0.001). Parents agreed more that routine childhood vaccines are more essential and effective as compared to the COVID-19 vaccine (Cohen's D: 0.946, and 0.826, consecutively; T-test p-value < 0.00). There is more parental anxiety about serious side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine vs. routine childhood vaccines (Cohen's D = 0.706, p-value < 0.001). Parents who relied on the Ministry of Health information were more predicted (OR = 1.28, p-value = 0.035) to intend to vaccinate as opposed to those who used the WHO website (OR = 0.47, −53%, p-value < 0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, the factors associated with intention to vaccinate children were parents who received COVID-19 vaccine, older parents, having children aged 12–18, and parents with lower education levels.

Conclusions: Significant proportion of parents are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine because they are less confident in its effectiveness, safety, and whether it is essential for their children. Relying on the national official healthcare authority's website for the source of information was associated with increased acceptance of childhood COVID-19 vaccination. As parental intention to vaccinate children against COVID-19 is suboptimal, healthcare authorities could boost vaccine uptake by campaigns targeting hesitant parents.

Anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently there is no systematic review and meta-analysis of the global incidence rates of anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the general adult population.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the incidence rates of anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions after COVID-19 vaccines and describe the demographic and clinical characteristics, triggers, presenting signs and symptoms, treatment and clinical course of confirmed cases.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] statement was followed.

METHODS

Electronic databases (Proquest, Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL, Wiley online library, and Nature) were searched from 1 December 2020 to 31 May 2021 in the English language using the following keywords alone or in combination: anaphylaxis, non-anaphylaxis, anaphylactic reaction, nonanaphylactic reaction, anaphylactic/anaphylactoid shock, hypersensitivity, allergy reaction, allergic reaction, immunology reaction, immunologic reaction, angioedema, loss of consciousness, generalized erythema, urticaria, urticarial rash, cyanosis, grunting, stridor, tachypnoea, wheezing, tachycardia, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting and tryptase. We included studies in adults of all ages in all healthcare settings. Effect sizes of prevalence were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). To minimize heterogeneity, we performed sub-group analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 1,734 papers that were identified, 26 articles were included in the systematic review (8 case report, 5 cohort, 4 case series, 2 randomized controlled trial and 1 randomized cross-sectional studies) and 14 articles (1 cohort, 2 case series, 1 randomized controlled trial and 1 randomized cross-sectional studies) were included in meta-analysis. Studies involving 26,337,421 vaccine recipients [Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 14,505,399) and Moderna (n = 11,831,488)] were analyzed. The overall pooled prevalence estimate of anaphylaxis to both vaccines was 5.0 (95% CI 2.9 to 7.2, I2 = 81%, p =  < 0.0001), while the overall pooled prevalence estimate of nonanaphylactic reactions to both vaccines was 53.9 (95% CI 0.0 to 116.1, I2 = 99%, p =  < 0.0001). Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech resulted in higher anaphylactic reactions compared to Moderna (8.0, 95% CI 0.0 to 11.3, I2 = 85% versus 2.8, 95% CI 0.0 to 5.7, I2 = 59%). However, lower incidence of nonanaphylactic reactions was associated with Pfizer-BioNTech compared to Moderna (43.9, 95% CI 0.0 to 131.9, I2 = 99% versus 63.8, 95% CI 0.0 to 151.8, I2 = 98%). The funnel plots for possible publication bias for the pooled effect sizes to determine the incidence of anaphylaxis and nonanaphylactic reactions associated with mRNA COVID-19 immunization based on mRNA vaccine type appeared asymmetrical on visual inspection, and Egger's tests confirmed asymmetry by producing p values < 0.05. Across the included studies, the most commonly identified risk factors for anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were female sex and personal history of atopy. The key triggers to anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions identified in these studies included foods, medications, stinging insects or jellyfish, contrast media, cosmetics and detergents, household products, and latex. Previous history of anaphylaxis; and comorbidities such as asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopic and contact eczema/dermatitis and psoriasis and cholinergic urticaria were also found to be important.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-associated anaphylaxis is very low; and nonanaphylactic reactions occur at higher rate, however, cutaneous reactions are largely self-limited. Both anaphylactic and nonanaphylactic reactions should not discourage vaccination.

Attitudes, acceptance and hesitancy among the general population worldwide to receive the COVID-19 vaccines and their contributing factors: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

High rates of vaccination worldwide are required to establish a herd immunity and stop the current COVID-19 pandemic evolution. Vaccine hesitancy is a major barrier in achieving herd immunity across different populations. This study sought to conduct a systematic review of the current literature regarding attitudes and hesitancy to receiving COVID-19 vaccination worldwide.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science was performed on July 5th, 2021, using developed keywords. Inclusion criteria required the study to (1) be conducted in English; (2) investigate attitudes, hesitancy, and/or barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among a given population; (3) utilize validated measurement techniques; (4) have the full text paper available and be peer-reviewed prior to final publication.

FINDINGS

Following PRISMA guidelines, 209 studies were included. The Newcastle Ottawa (NOS) scale for cross-sectional studies was used to assess the quality of the studies.Overall, vaccine acceptance rates ranged considerably between countries and between different time points, with Arabian countries showing the highest hesitancy rates compared with other parts of the world.

INTERPRETATION

A variety of different factors contributed to increased hesitancy, including having negative perception of vaccine efficacy, safety, convenience, and price. Some of the consistent socio-demographic groups that were identified to be associated with increased hesitancy included: women, younger participants, and people who were less educated, had lower income, had no insurance, living in a rural area, and self-identified as a racial/ethnic minority.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers in the fourth country to authorize BNT162b2 during the first month of rollout

BACKGROUND

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) was the fourth country in the world to authorize the BNT162b2 coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, which it rolled out on December 17, 2020 and first targeted at healthcare workers (HCWs). This study assesses vaccine uptake among this group during the first month of its availability.

METHODS

A national cross-sectional, pilot-validated, self-administered survey was conducted among HCWs in the KSA between December 27, 2020 and January 3, 2021. The survey included sociodemographic details, previous contact with COVID-19 patients, previous infection with COVID-19, receiving (or registering with the Ministry of Health website to receive) the COVID-19 vaccine, sources of HCWs' information on vaccines, awareness of emerging variants of concern, and anxiety level using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder assessment. A descriptive bivariate analysis and multivariate logistic binary regression analysis were performed. The primary evaluated outcome was vaccine uptake.

RESULTS

Of the 1058 participants who completed the survey, 704 (66.5%) were female, and 626 (59.2%) were nurses. Of all the respondents, 352 (33.27%) were enrolled to receive or had already received the vaccine, while 706 (66.73%) had not enrolled. In a bivariate analysis, not enrolling for vaccination was more likely in females than males (78.5% vs. 21.5%, P < 0.001), HCWs between the ages of 20 and 40 years than those >40 years (70.4% vs. 29.6%, P = 0.005), Saudi HCWs than expatriates (78% vs 22%, P < 0.001), and among HCWs who used social media as a source of information than those who did not (69.8% vs. 38.6%, P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, independent factors associated with uptake were being a Saudi national (aOR = 1.918, 95 %CI = 1.363-2.698, P < 0.001), working in an intensive care unit (aOR = 1.495, 95 %CI = 1.083-2.063, P = 0.014), and working at a university hospital (aOR = 1.867, 95 %CI = 1.380-2.525, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A low level of vaccine uptake was observed especially in female HCWs, those younger than 40 years old, and those who used social media as their source of vaccine information. This survey provides important information for public health authorities in order to scale up vaccination campaigns targeting these HCWs to increase vaccine enrollment and uptake.

COVID-19 Critical Care Simulations: An International Cross-Sectional Survey

Objective: To describe the utility and patterns of COVID-19 simulation scenarios across different international healthcare centers. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, international survey for multiple simulation centers team members, including team-leaders and healthcare workers (HCWs), based on each center's debriefing reports from 30 countries in all WHO regions. The main outcome measures were the COVID-19 simulations characteristics, facilitators, obstacles, and challenges encountered during the simulation sessions. Results: Invitation was sent to 343 simulation team leaders and multidisciplinary HCWs who responded; 121 completed the survey. The frequency of simulation sessions was monthly (27.1%), weekly (24.8%), twice weekly (19.8%), or daily (21.5%). Regarding the themes of the simulation sessions, they were COVID-19 patient arrival to ER (69.4%), COVID-19 patient intubation due to respiratory failure (66.1%), COVID-19 patient requiring CPR (53.7%), COVID-19 transport inside the hospital (53.7%), COVID-19 elective intubation in OR (37.2%), or Delivery of COVID-19 mother and neonatal care (19%). Among participants, 55.6% reported the team's full engagement in the simulation sessions. The average session length was 30-60 min. The debriefing process was conducted by the ICU facilitator in (51%) of the sessions followed by simulation staff in 41% of the sessions. A total of 80% reported significant improvement in clinical preparedness after simulation sessions, and 70% were satisfied with the COVID-19 sessions. Most perceived issues reported were related to infection control measures, followed by team dynamics, logistics, and patient transport issues. Conclusion: Simulation centers team leaders and HCWs reported positive feedback on COVID-19 simulation sessions with multidisciplinary personnel involvement. These drills are a valuable tool for rehearsing safe dynamics on the frontline of COVID-19. More research on COVID-19 simulation outcomes is warranted; to explore variable factors for each country and healthcare system.

Adenovirus and RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines' perceptions and acceptance among healthcare workers in Saudi Arabia: a national survey

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the perception, confidence, hesitancy and acceptance rate of various COVID-19 vaccine types among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia, a nation with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus experience.

DESIGN

National cross-sectional, pilot-validated questionnaire.

SETTING

Online, self-administered questionnaire among HCWs.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 2007 HCWs working in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia participated; 1512 (75.3%) participants completed the survey and were included in the analysis.

INTERVENTION

Data were collected through an online survey sent to HCWs during 1-15 November 2020. The main outcome measure was HCW acceptance of COVID-19 candidate vaccines. The associated factors of vaccination acceptance were identified through a logistic regression analysis and via measurement of the level of anxiety, using the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7 scale.

RESULTS

Among the 1512 HCWs who were included, 62.4% were women, 70.3% were between 21 and 40 years of age, and the majority (62.2%) were from tertiary hospitals. In addition, 59.5% reported knowing about at least one vaccine; 24.4% of the participants were sure about their willingness to receive the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, and 20.9% were willing to receive the RNA BNT162b2 vaccine. However, 18.3% reported that they would refuse to receive the Ad5-vectored vaccine, and 17.9% would refuse the Gam-COVID-Vac vaccine. Factors that influenced the differential readiness of HCWs included their perceptions of the vaccine's efficiency in preventing the infection (33%), their personal preferences (29%) and the vaccine's manufacturing country (28.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness by HCWs of the several COVID-19 candidate vaccines could improve their perceptions and acceptance of vaccination. Reliable sources on vaccine efficiency could improve vaccine uptake, so healthcare authorities should use reliable information to decrease vaccine hesitancy among frontline healthcare providers.