Background: The objective of this qualitative study was to explore the value of virtual IPE competition that involved a COVID-19 case among healthcare students and the lessons that can be learned to improve this experience in the future. Methods: The 27 senior students from the colleges of medicine, pharmacy, nursing, and paramedics were invited to two focus groups that followed the IPE competition and lasted 60 minutes each. A semi-structured focus group discussion guide was used in the focus group discussion to explore the benefits and limitations of the virtual IPE experience. Verbatim transcription of the two video-recorded sessions was conducted, and inductive thematic analysis was performed to uncover different emerging themes. Results: The number of students who consented to participate was 16 (59.26%). The IPE virtual competition was perceived favorably by all students; however, multiple organization and communication barriers were reported. Although the participants liked the IPE virtual competition, they clearly stated their preference for an in-person IPE competition over the virtual one. Managing a COVID-19 case was not perceived favorably by some participants due to the absence of evidence-based clinical guidelines supporting certain treatment protocols over others. Thus, some participants preferred a non-COVID-19 case where clear and evidence-based guidelines exist. Conclusion: The use of different IPE strategies to enhance healthcare students’ collaboration and understanding of their roles in the multidisciplinary healthcare team, especially during pandemic times, such as COVID-19, is possible. Future studies should examine new and innovative IPE strategies that address the identified limitations of virtual IPE.

Background and Objectives: Globally, diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a life-threatening disease that, if it remains uncontrolled, can lead to mortality or serious complications. Despite the noticeable benefits of clinical pharmacist in managing diabetes, some institutions in Saudi Arabia are reluctant to establish a pharmacist-led diabetic clinic for monitoring and follow-up. The objective of this study is to assess the glycemic control by comparing the reduction in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) percentage between patients followed in the pharmacist-led diabetic clinics vs. those followed in physician-led diabetic clinics. Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational study with a 12-month follow-up were used to detect the difference in the glycemic control by comparing the reduction in HbA1c percentage from the baseline, and average changes in HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG), blood pressure (BP), and lipid panel between the two groups. The level of self-care was assessed by Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) Questionnaire. Results: The study involved 52 patients who visited the diabetic clinic at a community teaching hospital. Exactly 24 patients were followed by the pharmacist-led diabetic clinics, while 28 were followed by physician-led diabetic clinics. HbA1c baseline was 8.7% and 8.4% for pharmacist and physician, respectively. The average difference in HbA1c for the pharmacist-led diabetic clinics vs. the physician-led diabetic clinics was not statistically significant (8.67 vs. 8.56; p = 0.77). Moreover, no difference in the glucose profile, lipid panel, and blood pressure were seen between the two groups. However, the median HbA1c change from baseline between the two groups significantly favored the pharmacist-led clinic (0.7 vs. 0.003; p = 0.04).The average of responses in all four aspects of the SDSCA (diet, exercise, blood sugar testing, and foot care) was also higher among patients in the pharmacist-led diabetic clinic. Conclusions: Pharmacist-led diabetic clinics for glycemic control and follow-up showed efficient results that encourage the comprehensive and integral inter-professional patient care.

BACKGROUND: Mask ventilation is an important rescue airway skill for providing oxygenation and ventilation. Maintaining a good face mask seal is a fundamental factor for successful ventilation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and comfortability of 2 commonly used mask ventilation techniques. METHODS: A randomized crossover study was performed to compare the 2-handed C-E and 2-handed V-E techniques on a simulation model. Respiratory therapists were recruited by convenience sampling to hold the mask during mechanical ventilation with a fixed tidal volume (V _T ) of 500 mL, a rate of 12 breaths/min and a PEEP of zero were provided. Each participant performed a 2-min ventilation session, with a total of 24 breaths for each technique. For each technique, we recorded the median V _T and the number of successful breaths (≥300 mL). Provider comfort was assessed by using a 5-point Likert scale at the end of the 2 techniques. Subgroup analyses were conducted for sex, experience, and height of the participants. RESULTS: Of the 75 respiratory therapists recruited, 74 participants were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant difference in the median V _T between the V-E (417 mL [interquartile range, 396–427] mL) and C-E techniques (410 [interquartile range, 391–423] mL) (P = .82). Approximately 74% of breaths delivered by the C-E technique were effective, whereas only 68% of those delivered by the V-E technique were effective (P < .001). Most of the participants reported that using the 2-handed C-E technique was more comfortable. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the median V _T did not differ significantly between the 2 techniques. However, the C-E technique seemed to be superior to the V-E technique in terms of the number of effectively delivered breaths and comfortability. Further studies are recommended for basic airway management techniques.

Objective: To evaluate paramedic ability in recognizing 12-lead Electrocardiogram (ECG) with ST-segment Elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This is a quantitative exploratory cross-sectional study using an electronic survey of paramedics was conducted between June and September 2021. The survey included demographics, educational and clinical experiences, and multiple 12-lead ECG strip questions to assess participants’ ability to recognize STEMI. We reported the overall sensitivity, specificity, and correct proportions with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). Results: Eighty-four paramedics completed the survey, and 65% of them were between 24 and 29 years old, with a median, of three years of field experience. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 58.39% (95% CI, 50.4% to 66.1%) and 29.01% (95% CI, 25.15% to 33.1%), respectively. In total, 67.1% correctly identified inferior STEMI, whereas only 50% correctly identified lateral STEMI. Both STEMIs were correctly identified by 41%, and the majority misinterpreted STEMI mimics (ECG rhythms with similar ECG morphology to STEMI). The proportion who correctly recognized left bundle branch block was 14.8%, pericarditis was 10.9%, and ventricular pacing was 1.4%. However, almost third of participants correctly identified right bundle branch block (32.9%) and left ventricle hypertrophy (30.7%). Overall, there was no correlation between the correct ECG interpretation of STEMIs and educational and clinical experiences. Conclusion: Paramedics were able to identify STEMI events in prehospital settings with moderate sensitivity and low specificity with limited ability to differentiate between STEMI and STEMI mimics. Therefore, additional training in ECG interpretation could improve their clinical decision-making, and to ensure that proper care and treatment is provided. Further research on a large, representative sample of paramedics across the country could provide more definitive evidence to establish a greater degree of accuracy in detecting STEMI in prehospital settings.

Objective: To identify influences on learning for Saudi male students studying Emergency Medical Services at a college in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Previous research on influences on student learning in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia focused on the historical development of education in Saudi Arabia, English language development, and intrinsic motivations of students and excluded a focus on students studying Emergency Medical Services. Methods: Exploratory sequential mixed-methods study was deployed. Results: Family support was an exceptionally strong predictor of student confidence in both skills and post-graduate EMS employment. Concepts involving application, memorization, motivation, and English language did not present as statically significant. The discovery of the strong influences that a family can have on Saudi EMS student’s confidence is noteworthy, as this was not previously discovered in the literature. Conclusion: This discovery holds practical implications for EMS education and training programs as emphasizes the importance of developing practical ways to include a student’s family as a source of support in ensuring student success and confidence.