In early 2021, vaccination against COVID-19 became one of the most important measures needed to control the pandemic. This study aimed to investigate the levels of acceptance and factors affecting the decisions among Saudi parents and caregivers of children under 12 for getting them vaccinated. A cross-sectional survey of 1000 caregivers and parents was carried out from May 2021 to June 2021. The participants were from the eastern, central, southern, western, and northern provinces of Saudi Arabia. The data were collected and managed using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft^® Corp., Redmond, WA) and analyzed using SPSS version 23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Of the 1000 respondents, 281 (28.1%) reported they would vaccinate their children, 346 (34.6%) rejected vaccination, and 373 (37.3%) were not sure. Most caregivers (24.1%; n = 241) reported protecting children as the principal reason for accepting vaccination. Regarding those rejecting the vaccine, the most common concern was that children might experience side effects (42.9%; n = 429). The acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine is dynamic and changes with legislations and public awareness policies. COVID-19 vaccine acceptance for children was low at the time of this study compared to the United Kingdom and United States. To achieve vaccination coverage that is adequate for herd immunity in Saudi Arabia, intense educational and awareness strategies are needed.

Objective: Round window approaches are used to insert a cochlear implant electrode array into the scala tympani. This study aimed to review the literature to find the reported round window approaches.Method: This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (‘PRISMA’) guidelines. Articles that described their surgical approach to the round window were included. The PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched through to June 2021. The study protocol was registered on Prospero (reference number: CRD42021226940).Results: A total of 42 reports were included. The following approaches were documented: the standard facial recess, keyhole, retrofacial, modified suprameatal, transaditus, combined posterior tympanotomy and endomeatal, modified Veria, canal wall down approaches, and endoscopically assisted technique.Conclusion: This review suggested that there are numerous distinct round window approaches, providing alternatives when the round window is inaccessible through the standard facial recess.

Using anatomy-based fitting, we can determine the place-specific map with individualized center frequencies for each electrode contact that is a closer match to the natural pitch-place of the cochlea. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the tonal presentation across the electrode array and to calculate the semitone difference between each adjacent pair of contacts according to their anatomy-based map. The secondary objective is to determine the distancing of the contacts that would result in an equal semitone difference with a uniform tonal presentation. A total of 167 ears were included in this retrospective study. The frequencies across the electrode arrays were found to be unequally presented. The semitonal condensations were higher in the apical inter-contact spaces compared to the basal inter-contact spaces, being 3.0–2.3 semitones/mm (Kruskal Wallis test, p < 0.000). The anatomy-based spacing of the electrode contacts was larger in the basal inter-contact spaces compared to the apical inter-contact spaces, ranging from 1.92 to 1.48 mm. In conclusion, the current electrode designs do not have uniform tonal representation throughout the electrode array. There is a more condensed tonal presentation in the apical electrodes than in the basal electrodes, resulting in a lower tonal resolution in the apical region.

Objective: This paper aims to provide a step‑by‑step guide for organizing humanitarian cochlear implant missions (HCIMs). Methods: A panel of experienced professionals collaborated through informal, focused group discussions to create this comprehensive guide for organizing HCIMs. It includes a flowchart, a checklist, and detailed descriptions of each step, offering a clear and structured framework for the process. Subsequently, additional advisors were invited to evaluate this outline and provide their input. Results: All participants approved the final version after the outline was improved. This guide proposes the following eight steps: (1) aim and funding, (2) project study, (3) preparation, (4) local system setup (local team recruitment and patient recruitment), (5) pilot campaign, (6) full‑scale campaign, (7) On‑site process, and (8) follow‑up. Thirteen items are specified across the eight main steps in a detailed checklist. All participants approved the final version after the outline was improved. Conclusion: The proposed good practice guide (GPG) includes a flowchart and a checklist that provides a comprehensive manual for establishing, conducting, and organizing international HCIMs. Understanding the process that is expected to be followed when planning an international HCIMs enables the involved parties to organize and assign tasks and create a schedule that allows them to finish their tasks on time and with the best quality. This guide could be a basis to describe an organized process, resulting in professional and distinguished campaigns.