Objectives. The study is aimed at evaluating knowledge, attitude, and barriers to telemedicine among the general population in Egypt. Methods. A questionnaire-based cross-sectional design was carried out among the general Egyptian population. A convenience sampling method was used to approach the eligible participants from University Teaching Hospitals of eight governorates from May to July 2020. Results. A total of 686 participants filled the questionnaire (49.4% were males, mean age years old). Half of the participants stated that they previously used a telemedicine tool, mainly to follow up laboratory results (67.3%). Video or phone calls (39.3%) and mobile applications (23.7%) were the most commonly recognized telemedicine tools by the participants. The included participants exhibited a high level of knowledge and attitude towards telemedicine. On the other hand, 21.9% stated that telemedicine services could jeopardize patient privacy. 32.8% reported that telemedicine service could lead to disclosing medical information to people who are not authorized to do so. Almost half of the participants agreed to strongly agreed that telemedicine service could increase medical errors. 60.80% of the participants said that they are more likely to prefer telemedicine than traditional ways. However, 13.70% stated that telemedicine is more likely to be challenging to use. Conclusion. The Egyptian population has high knowledge about the applications of telemedicine. In addition, the vast majority of Egyptians appear to perceive the benefits of telemedicine positively and are willing to use it. However, some barriers that have been found must be taken into consideration to adopt telemedicine successfully, especially for people who are old, are low educated, and live in remote areas. Future studies should address the utility of telemedicine in improving the quality of healthcare and patient’s health outcome and quality of life.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) booster doses decrease infection transmission and disease severity. This study aimed to assess the acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses in low, middle, and high-income countries of the East Mediterranean Region (EMR) and its determinants using the health belief model (HBM). In addition, we aimed to identify the causes of booster dose rejection and the main source of information about vaccination. Using the snowball and convince sampling technique, a bilingual, self-administered, anonymous questionnaire was used to collect the data from 14 EMR countries through different social media platforms. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the key determinants that predict vaccination acceptance among respondents. Overall, 2327 participants responded to the questionnaire. In total, 1468 received compulsory doses of vaccination. Of them, 739 (50.3%) received booster doses and 387 (26.4%) were willing to get the COVID-19 vaccine booster doses. Vaccine booster dose acceptance rates in low, middle, and high-income countries were 73.4%, 67.9%, and 83.0%, respectively (p < 0.001). Participants who reported reliance on information about the COVID-19 vaccination from the Ministry of Health websites were more willing to accept booster doses (79.3% vs. 66.6%, p < 0.001). The leading causes behind booster dose rejection were the beliefs that booster doses have no benefit (48.35%) and have severe side effects (25.6%). Determinants of booster dose acceptance were age (odds ratio (OR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01–1.03, p = 0.002), information provided by the Ministry of Health (OR = 3.40, 95% CI: 1.79–6.49, p = 0.015), perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 infection (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.21–2.93, p = 0.005), perceived severity of COVID-19 (OR = 2.08, 95% CI: 137–3.16, p = 0.001), and perceived risk of side effects (OR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.19–0.34, p < 0.001). Booster dose acceptance in EMR is relatively high. Interventions based on HBM may provide useful directions for policymakers to enhance the population’s acceptance of booster vaccination.

Background: Fostering a culture of clinical effectiveness among healthcare professionals (HCPs) is crucial to achieving optimal patient health outcomes. To our knowledge, there is a lack of robust evidence-based practice (EBP) tools to assess the competence of HCPs in EBP in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR). Aim: This study aims to comprehensively investigate the construct validity and internal reliability of the evidence-based practice questionnaire (EBPQ) among HCPs in the EMR. Methods: This multinational and multi-disciplinary cross-sectional study was conducted between 27 April and 11 May 2023. Convenience and snowball sampling methods were used to recruit a sample of HCPs (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, dentists, and pharmacists) using an electronic survey questionnaire for data capture. To assess the reliability of the instrument, Cronbach’s alpha, inter-item reliability, and split-half reliability analyses were conducted. Furthermore, the convergent and discriminant validity of the questionnaire was ensured by calculating the average variance extracted (AVE) and the correlation coefficient between the different constructs, respectively. Factor loadings and cross-loadings of different indicators within each construct were calculated by performing both exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Results: A total of 1536 HCPs from 18 countries in the EMR (response rate = 96.786%) with a median age of 28 years participated; 47% were female, and 55% had Arabic as their first language. English was the most common language for a bachelor’s degree in science (54%). The construct validity of the EBPQ was investigated using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), which yielded four loaded factors. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) confirmed the four loaded factors. The CFA model showed that the root mean square error of approximation = 0.066, comparative fit index = 0.95, Tucker–Lewis’s index = 0.94, standardized root mean square residual = 0.033, normal fit index = 0.94, goodness of fit = 0.91, and χ² test statistic= 22,553, with p < 0.001. The AVE values of the four factors were close to 1 (knowledge = 0.6, practice = 0.6, attitude = 0.5, and sharing = 0.7), thus supporting the convergent validity of the EBPQ. The four domains had Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and Omega ≥ 0.7 (knowledge = 0.9, practice = 0.9, attitude = 0.7, and sharing = 0.8), suggesting that the items within each domain had good internal consistency. These results support the discriminant validity of the EBPQ. Conclusions: The EBPQ is a robust questionnaire that can be completed in less than 10 min by EMR HCPs and can be used as a gold-standard questionnaire to collect valid data on the attitudes, knowledge, and proficiency of HCPs in making clinical decisions based on evidence. Future studies are recommended to investigate the retest reliability.

Background: The variation in the reported vaccine safety and effectiveness could contribute to the high rates of vaccine hesitancy among the general population and healthcare workers in areas where monkeypox (mpox) is circulating. In this review, our objective was to evaluate the safety, immunogenicity, effectiveness, and efficacy of the mpox vaccines. Methods: An extensive search for articles across multiple databases was performed, including searching six databases (PubMed Central, PubMed Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, ProQuest), two pre-print databases (European PMC Preprint and MedRxiv), and Google Scholar. Results: A total of 4290 citations were retrieved from the included databases. Following the removal of duplicates and the initial screening of records, a total of 36 studies were included into the analysis. Additionally, we identified five more studies through manual searches, resulting in a total of 41 eligible articles for qualitative synthesis. The study findings revealed that mpox vaccines demonstrate the ability to generate adequate antibodies; however, their effectiveness may decrease over time, exhibiting varying safety profiles. Most of the included studies consistently reported substantial levels of effectiveness and efficacy against mpox. Interestingly, the number of vaccine doses administered was found to influence the degree of immunogenicity, subsequently impacting the overall effectiveness and efficacy of the vaccines. Furthermore, we found that smallpox vaccines exhibited a form of cross-protection against mpox. Conclusions: Vaccines can be used to prevent mpox and effectively control its spread.