Background: Telehealth services are widely used in Saudi Arabia. Despite this, neither the use rate nor the attitudes, perceptions, and barriers concerning telehealth applications have been evaluated nationally from the perspective of healthcare providers (HCPs). Aim: This study aims to explore the use rate of telehealth, as well as the attitudes, perceptions, and barriers concerning telehealth use in Saudi Arabia from the perspective of HCPs. Methods and design: A cross-sectional survey was conducted and distributed to all HCPs between 16 November 2021 and 16 March 2022, through an online platform (Survey Monkey). Results: Overall, 1034 HCPs completed the online survey, of which 65.0% (n = 677) were male. Physicians accounted for 22.34%, while nurses and respiratory therapists accounted for 22.34% and 21.47%, respectively. Only 491 HCPs (47%) have used telehealth applications, the majority for less than a year (21.47%) or from one to three years (14.51%). Around 44% of HCPs perceived telehealth as being useful in quality and care delivery. Around 43% of HCPs felt comfortable using telehealth, and 45.45% perceived telehealth as being useful for patients with transportation difficulties. Additionally, 38% believed that telehealth provides a confidential way of protecting patients’ information, and 36% would like to receive more training in telehealth. Speech-language therapists and public health professionals were the highest HCP users (98% and 95%, respectively), while general physicians and dentists were the lowest users (44% and 55%, respectively). Lack of time or a busy schedule was the most common barrier to not using telehealth among all HCPs (38%). Conclusion: The use of telehealth was perceived as being positive as well as valuable and confidential in monitoring and providing care. However, challenges such as the lack of time or a busy schedule impeded the use of telehealth among HCPs in Saudi Arabia.

Background: Smoking behavior has been associated with poor academic performance among adult students worldwide. However, the detrimental effect of nicotine dependence on several students’ academic achievement indicators is still unclear. This study aims to assess the impact of smoking status and nicotine dependence on grade point average (GPA), absenteeism rate and academic warnings among undergraduate health sciences students in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A validated cross-sectional survey was conducted, in which, participants responded to questions evaluated cigarette consumption, urge to consume and dependency, learning performance, days of absentees, and academic warnings. Results: A total of 501 students from different health specialties have completed the survey. Of whom, 66% were male, 95% ranging between the age of 18– 30 years old, and 81% reported no health issues or chronic diseases. Current smokers estimated to be 30% of the respondents, of which 36% revealed smoking history of 2– 3 years. The prevalence of nicotine dependency (high to extremely high) was 50%. Overall, smokers had significantly lower GPA, higher absenteeism rate, and higher number of academic warnings when compared to nonsmokers (p< 0.001). Heavy smokers demonstrated significantly less GPA (p=0.036), higher days of absences (p=0.017), and more academic warnings (p=0.021) compared to light smokers. The linear regression model indicated a significant association between smoking history (increased pack-per-year) and poor GPA (p=0.01) and increased number of academic warning last semester (p=0.01), while increased cigarette consumption was substantially linked with higher academic warnings (p=0.002), lower GPA (p=0.01), and higher absenteeism rate for last semester (p=0.01). Conclusion: Smoking status and nicotine dependence were predictive of worsening academic performance, including lower GPA, higher absenteeism rate and academic warnings. In addition, there is a substantial and unfavorable dose–response association between smoking history and cigarette consumption with impaired academic performance indicators.

COVID-19 poses a significant burden to healthcare systems. Healthcare organisations with better health innovation infrastructures have faced a reduced burden and achieved success in curbing COVID-19. In Saudi Arabia, digital technologies have played a vital role in fighting SARS-CoV-2 transmission. In this paper, we aimed to summarise the experience of optimising digital health technologies in Saudi Arabia as well as to discuss capabilities and opportunities during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. A literature search was conducted up to September 2021 to document the experience of using DHTPs in Saudi Arabia in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. We also considered any published data, press briefings, and announcements by the MOH in Saudi Arabia. The findings were synthesised in narrative form. Health officials succeeded in optimising and maintaining a strategy to mitigate the spread of the virus via different digital technologies, such as mobile health applications, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. The quick digital response in Saudi Arabia was facilitated by governmental support and by considering users and technology determinants. Future research must concentrate on establishing and updating the guidelines for using DHTPs.

Background Oscillatory positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) devices are intended to facilitate sputum clearance and reduce cough, but there is limited evidence for their effectiveness in COPD, or to guide patient selection. We aimed to assess the impact of OPEP therapy on quality of life and objective measures of cough and sleep disturbance in patients with COPD with regular sputum production. Methods We enrolled stable patients with COPD, who reported sputum production every day or most days, into an assessor-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial comparing 3 months of using an Acapella device against usual care (including use of the active cycle of breathing technique). The primary outcome was cough-related quality of life measured using the Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ). Secondary outcomes included fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy, FACIT score) and generic quality of life (EuroQol-5 Dimensions, EQ-5D). In a substudy (n=45), objective monitoring of cough and disturbance/movement during sleep were also available. Results 122 participants (61/61 OPEP/control) were recruited, 40% female, 17% smokers, FEV1 38 (25–56)% predicted, and age 62±10 years. 103 completed the study (55/48 OPEP/control). Use of OPEP was associated with an improvement in LCQ compared with controls; MD (95% CI) 1.03 (0.71 to 2.10); (p=0.03), FACIT score 4.68 (1.34 to 8.02); (p<0.001) and EQ-5D 4.00 (0.49 to 19.75); (p=0.04). There was also an improvement in cough frequency −60 (−43 to −95) coughs/24 hours (p<0.001), but no statistically significant effect on sleep disturbance was identified. Conclusions Regular use of an Acapella device improves symptoms and quality of life in people with COPD who produce sputum daily or most days. Trial registration number ISRCTN44651852.

Background Singing for lung health (SLH) is an arts-based breathing control and movement intervention for people with long-term respiratory conditions, intended to improve symptoms and quality of life. Online, remotely delivered programmes might improve accessibility; however, no previous studies have assessed the effectiveness of this approach. Methods We conducted an assessor-blind randomised controlled trial comparing the impact of 12 weeks of once-weekly online SLH sessions against usual care on health-related quality of life, assessed using the RAND 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) Mental Health Composite (MHC) and Physical Health Composite (PHC) scores. Results We enrolled 115 people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), median (IQR) age 69 (62–74), 56.5% females, 80% prior pulmonary rehabilitation, Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale 4 (3–4), forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted 49 (35–63). 50 participants in each arm completed the study. The intervention arm experienced improvements in physical but not mental health components of RAND SF-36; PHC (regression coefficient (95% CI): 1.77 (95% CI 0.11 to 3.44); p=0.037), but not MHC (0.86 (95% CI −1.68 to 3.40); p=0.504). A prespecified responder analysis based on achieving a 10% improvement from baseline demonstrated a response rate for PHC of 32% in the SLH arm and 12.7% for usual care (p=0.024). A between-group difference in responder rate was not found in relation to the MHC (19.3% vs 25.9%; p=0.403). Discussion and conclusion A 12-week online SLH programme can improve the physical component of quality of life for people with COPD, but the overall effect is relatively modest compared with the impact seen in research using face-to-face group sessions. Further work on the content, duration and dose of online interventions may be useful. Trial registration number NCT04034212.

Objectives To assess the attitude of healthcare providers (HCPs) towards the delivering of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and identify factors and barriers that might influence referral. Design A cross-sectional online survey consisting of nine multiple-choice questions. Settings Saudi Arabia. Participants 980 HCPs including nurses, respiratory therapists (RT) and physiotherapists. Primary outcome measures HCPs attitudes towards and expectations of the delivery of PR to COPD patients and the identification of factors and barriers that might influence referral in Saudi Arabia. Results Overall, 980 HCPs, 53.1% of whom were men, completed the survey. Nurses accounted for 40.1% of the total sample size, and RTs and physiotherapists accounted for 32.1% and 16.5%, respectively. The majority of HCPs strongly agreed that PR would improve exercise capacity 589 (60.1%), health-related quality of life 571 (58.3%), and disease self-management in patients with COPD 589 (60.1%). Moreover, the in-hospital supervised PR programme was the preferred method of delivering PR, according to 374 (38.16%) HCPs. Around 85% of HCPs perceived information about COPD, followed by smoking cessation 787 (80.3%) as essential components of PR besides the exercise component. The most common patient-related factor that strongly influenced referral decisions was ‘mobility affected by breathlessness’ (64%), while the ‘availability of PR centres’ (61%), the ‘lack of trained HCPs’ (52%) and the ‘lack of authority to refer patients’ (44%) were the most common barriers to referral. Conclusion PR is perceived as an effective management strategy for patients with COPD. A supervised hospital-based programme is the preferred method of delivering PR, with information about COPD and smoking cessation considered essential components of PR besides the exercise component. A lack of PR centres, well-trained staff and the authority to refer patients were major barriers to referring patients with COPD. Further research is needed to confirm HCP perceptions of patient-related barriers.