The economy of Saudi Arabia is currently undergoing a major transformation which will have an impact on employment in the pharmacy sector. However, quantitative data characterizing the pharmacy workforce in the Kingdom are currently not available. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the current status of the licensed pharmacy workforce in the pharmacy field in Saudi Arabia. Descriptive statistics were performed on data from the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) as of March 2017. The labor market for pharmacists in Saudi Arabia is dominated by expatriates. Saudi nationals constitute less than 20% of the pharmacists employed in the Kingdom. The underemployment of Saudis is most evident in the largest sectors of the pharmacy field, namely, private health care establishments, community pharmacies, and pharmaceutical companies. There is an unmet need to train Saudi citizens as pharmacists and retain them in the workforce. Addressing this issue should become an important objective in Saudi Arabia’s Vision for 2030.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has shown steady growth in the dental workforce over the last 20 years. Although the number of dental colleges has significantly increased in the last decade, there is not any study so far that described the status of the licensed dentist workforce in the kingdom. The present study aimed to explore the demographic distribution and professional characteristics of licensed dentist workforce in Saudi Arabia. This was a descriptive cross-sectional study using the Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS) database to identify the number of licensed dentists in Saudi Arabia as well as their professional and demographic characteristics as of December 2016. The data was categorized based on gender, nationality, dental specialty, health sector, geographic location, and professional rank. The number of licensed dentists working in the kingdom as of December 2016 was 16887 dentists, and the vast majority of them are professionally registered as general dentists (70.27%). The percentage of general dentists among the professionally registered female dentists is significantly higher than their male counterparts (79.71% vs. 64.80%; P < 0.001). Only 22.08% of the dentists working in the kingdom are Saudi. Most of the dentist workforce in the kingdom are male (61.06%). The mean age of the Saudi dentists is slightly but significantly younger than non-Saudi dentists (37.7 vs. 40.7 years; P < 0.001). Over 80% of the Saudi dentists are working in the regions of Riyadh, Makkah, and Eastern province. About 66% of the Saudi dentists are working in the public health sector in comparison to only 20.46% of the non-Saudi dentists (P < 0.001). Most of the dental care in Saudi Arabia is provided by non-Saudi dentists in both private and public health sectors. With the rising unemployment rate among Saudi dentists, the governmental bodies that are responsible of dental labor market regulations such as the ministries of health, economy and planning, and labor should come up with a policy to gradually but carefully replace the non-Saudi dentists in both public and private sectors with Saudi dentists.

Objectives: Assess the survival of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients across age groups, sex, use of mechanical ventilators (MVs), nationality, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Methods: Data were retrieved from the Saudi Ministry of Health (MoH) between 1 March and 29 May 2020. Kaplan–Meier (KM) analyses and multiple Cox proportional-hazards regression were conducted to assess the survival of hospitalized COVID-19 patients from hospital admission to discharge (censored) or death. Micro-costing was used to estimate the direct medical costs associated with hospitalization per patient. Results: The number of included patients with complete status (discharge or death) was 1422. The overall 14-day survival was 0.699 (95%CI: 0.652–0.741). Older adults (>70 years) (HR = 5.00, 95%CI = 2.83–8.91), patients on MVs (5.39, 3.83–7.64), non-Saudi patients (1.37, 1.01–1.89), and ICU admission (2.09, 1.49–2.93) were associated with a high risk of mortality. The mean cost per patient (in SAR) for those admitted to the general Medical Ward (GMW) and ICU was 42,704.49 ± 29,811.25 and 79,418.30 ± 55,647.69, respectively. Conclusion: The high hospitalization costs for COVID-19 patients represents a significant public health challenge. Efficient allocation of healthcare resources cannot be emphasized enough.

Background: Cancer patients are at high risk for mental illness and, in turn, poorer health-related quality of life. This study used nationally representative United States (US) data to examine nuances of the impact of depression and/or anxiety on HRQoL in different cancer groups (e.g., cancer only, cancer and depression, cancer and anxiety, cancer and both conditions). Methods: Adult patients aged 18 years and older with a cancer diagnosis were identified from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data for 2012–2016. HRQoL was measured using the SF-12 Physical and Mental Component Summary (PCS & MCS) scores. Multivariate linear regressions were used, controlling for a multitude of factors. Results: Around 12% of the 1712 identified patients with cancer had depression, 13% had anxiety, and 8.4% had both depression and anxiety. Patients with comorbid depression and anxiety had the lowest mean scores of both PCS and MCS compared to patients in other groups. In addition, cancer patients with either depression and/or anxiety were more likely to have lower MCS scores compared to those with cancer only (depression: β = −6.554; anxiety: β = −3.916; both conditions: β = −11.759, p < 0.001). Interestingly, patients with comorbid depression and anxiety were more likely to have higher PCS scores compared to those with cancer only. Conclusions: The psychological burden of cancer is immense, with a substantial impact on patients’ HRQoL. Routine screening for depression and anxiety, especially for women and those with low poverty status and comorbidities, should be conducted by healthcare providers to identify those with high odds of having a lower HRQoL. Additionally, early psychiatric interventions, such as psychotherapy and prescription drugs, may positively impact patients’ mental well-being and HRQoL.

Background: Metformin is commonly prescribed to manage polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), which is one of the most common endocrine disorders among women of childbearing age and is associated with high prevalence rates of depression and anxiety. Objective: This study’s objective was to determine the impact of prescribed metformin on depression and anxiety levels of patients with PCOS. Methods: This prospective, multi-center, cohort study examined the impact of prescribed metformin on the depression and anxiety of women with PCOS in four gynecology clinics in Saudi Arabia and Jordan. The women had recently been prescribed metformin along with lifestyle modifications, such as diet and exercise, and were compared to another group of women with PCOS who were prescribed lifestyle modifications only. Depression and anxiety were assessed at baseline and three months later using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scale, respectively. Health-related quality of life was measured using the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the impact of metformin on depression and anxiety. Results: Eighty-six women participated in the study: 53 were prescribed metformin with lifestyle modifications, and 33 were prescribed lifestyle modifications only. The women on metformin had 70% lower odds of having major depression (PHQ-9≥ 10) (OR=0.302, P=0.045); however, no significant effect of metformin on anxiety (GAD-7≥ 10) was found. Conclusion: Metformin may have a role in the management of depression symptoms among patients with PCOS; however, its potential antidepressant effect should be further examined in randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials.

The use of traditional medicinal plants in Saudi Arabia stems mainly from consumers’ belief in prophetic medicine. This study was conducted to explore changes in patients’ use of dietary or herbal supplements among individuals infected with COVID-19 before and during infection and the association between herbal or dietary supplements and hospitalization. A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted enrolling symptomatic patients who had recently recovered from COVID-19. Data were collected through phone interviews, and McNemar’s test was used to investigate changes to consumption of dietary or herbal supplements before and during infection. Multivariable logistic regression was used to investigate the association between supplements use during patients’ infection and hospitalization. A total of 738 patients were included in this study, of whom 32.1% required hospitalization. About 57% of participants were male with a mean age of 36.5 (±11.9) years. The use of lemon/orange, honey, ginger, vitamin C, and black seed among participants significantly increased during their infection. In contrast, patients using anise, peppermint, and coffee peel before their infection were more likely to stop using them during their infection. In addition, using lemon/orange (p < 0.0001), honey (p = 0.0002), ginger (p = 0.0053), vitamin C (p = 0.0006), black seed (p < 0.0001), peppermint (p = 0.0027), costus (p = 0.0095), and turmeric (p = 0.0012) was significantly higher among nonhospitalized patients than hospitalized ones. However, in the multivariable logistic regression, only use of vitamin C (OR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.33–0.79), peppermint (OR = 0.53; 95% CI 0.31–0.90), and lemon/orange (OR = 0.54; 95% CI 0.33–0.88) was associated with significantly lower odds of hospitalization. The study reveals that patients’ consumption of dietary or herbal supplements changed in response to their COVID-19 infection, with hospitalized patients having a lower likelihood of using these supplements. Because some supplements were associated with lower odds of hospitalization, these supplements or their bioactive components should be further investigated as feasible options for COVID-19 treatment.