Background/Objectives: Compliance with healthcare standards is an absolute must for every healthcare organization seeking accreditation. Several factors were found to affect compliance, and in Saudi Arabia, certain standards were observed for non-compliance. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to identify the factors associated with non-compliance with healthcare accreditation in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This study adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) model was used to refine the research question. The Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (Press) guidelines were used to improve the search strategy. The databases used for the search were PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The dates searched were from 1 January 2000 to 1 November 2024. We used a data extraction form for study characteristics and outcome data, which was piloted on five studies in this review. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The analysis was carried out using the Fisher r-to-z transformed correlation coefficient as the outcome measure. A random-effects model was fitted to the data. Results: A total of ten studies were included for qualitative synthesis and five for quantitative synthesis. Several factors were observed for non-compliance, including insufficient training organization hurdles, a lack of implementation strategies, and the attitudes of healthcare providers. The estimated average correlation coefficient based on the random-effects model was 0.2568 (95% CI: −0.1190 to 0.6326). Conclusions: The dimension of quality in healthcare through pooled correlations from various studies highlighted a weak association among these dimensions.

Background/Objectives: Periodontal disease is an infection of the surrounding and supporting tissues of the teeth. Several associations have been identified for systemic conditions. This study aimed to assess the awareness of pregnant women regarding the link between premature and low-weight births with periodontal diseases. Methods: Using a cross-sectional design, we collected data from the target participants through the Pregnant Women’s Periodontal Awareness Questionnaire, employing a convenience sampling technique between November and December 2023. Statistical analyses were performed using descriptive statistics. The statistical significance of all estimations was set at a p-value of ≤0.05. Results: Most participants were ≥31 years of age (210 participants; 67.3%). The percentage of pregnancies occurring in women who were multigravida was 69.6%. Only 29.5% of the participants were knowledgeable about low-weight and premature births with periodontal diseases. The findings indicate an association between the education level and trimester (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Pregnant women’s awareness regarding periodontal disease is low, and one-third of them do not visit dental clinics during pregnancy. Expanding access to dental care and reducing anxiety about treatment outcomes can strengthen the relationship between oral health and general health.

Patient compliance following periodontal therapy is extremely important in predicting the prognosis of the disease and maintaining treatment outcomes. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the perception of periodontitis patients about treatment outcomes. A cross-sectional study was conducted among periodontitis patients in a single dental center through a pre-validated questionnaire that was distributed to each participant in the waiting area of periodontal clinics by utilizing a convenience sampling technique. Median and interquartile ranges were used in addition to frequency and percentages. Bivariate analyses were performed using the Mann–Whitney U and Kruskal–Wallis test. Among the 300 male and female participants, the median score (interquartile range) of the current level of pain revealed that males experienced more pain than females, with a median score of 5 (0–7) for males and 4 (0–6) for women. However, the median (interquartile range) for desired and expected pain levels in both genders was 0 (0–1), 0 (0–4). There were significant differences in median score ratings between males and females for expected, distress, success, and importance levels (p-value < 0.05). Patients with periodontitis provided valuable insights into the experiences of individuals undergoing treatment for periodontal disease, indicating overall patient satisfaction with the expected levels of periodontal outcomes.

Background: Self-medication (SM) among women during pregnancy poses a critical risk to maternal health, and SM is still commonly practiced in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, this study aims to assess the factors, attitudes, and prevalence of SM among pregnant women in the Ministry of Health (MOH) First Health Cluster. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used among 400 pregnant women who received care at primary, secondary, and tertiary healthcare levels. A structured tool was adopted and modified based on the literature review, expert and focus group interviews, and the experiences of the target participants. The dependent variables included history of illness, access to healthcare services, medication usage, and perception of SM, while the independent variables included socioeconomic status. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), Version 25 was used for analysis. Results: The prevalence of SM was 36.5%. Cough syrup and antipyretics were the most commonly used medications, while hair problems and weight loss were the most frequently reported reasons for SM. The primary sources of information guiding SM behavior were prior prescriptions and previous experience. Education level, occupation, age, number of pregnancies, and miscarriage history were all significantly associated with SM (p < 0.05). Conclusions: SM was found to be frequent among pregnant women in the First Health Cluster, highlighting the need for educational interventions and regulatory measures to reduce unsafe practices and improve maternal health.

Background: Assessing healthcare provider performance factors (HCPP) is crucial for enhancing the quality of healthcare services and the overall effectiveness of the healthcare system. Existing measurement tools often focus on limited aspects of factors independently and fail to comprehensively capture the organizational and individual factors influencing performance across diverse healthcare settings. To address this gap, this study developed and validated a multidimensional tool to assess HCPP across diverse settings. Methods: The validation process involved a two-phase analysis, in which Phase 1 used Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to establish the initial factorial structure and Cronbach's alpha to assess preliminary internal consistency reliability, while Phase 2 employed Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to evaluate the model's fit, composite reliability, and construct convergent and discriminant validity. Results: EFA identified six factors consisting of Feedback and Organizational Support (FOS), Environment and Tools (ET), Incentives and Consequences (IC), Health Status (HS), Work-Family Conflict (WFC), and Healthcare Provider Performance (HCP),.explaining 63.7% of the total variance. The reliability of the scale was high (Cronbach's α = 0.837), with domains’ subscales ranging from 0.793 to 0.906. CFA confirmed the six-factor model with acceptable indices fit (CFI = 0.91, RMSEA = 0.08, GFI = 0.91). All factors loading exceeded 0.60 ( p < 0.001). CR values ranged from 0.765 to 0.910, and AVE values supported the convergent validity (0.583–0.736). Discriminant for most of the constructs was established. Conclusion: The HCPP scale demonstrates acceptable psychometric properties, including acceptable reliability, factorial structure, and construct validity. The tool provides a robust measurement for assessing the factors associated with healthcare provider performance concerning individual and contextual-level determinants.

Background: The dirty utility room (DUR) plays a vital role in maintaining and optimizing the safety of patients and healthcare staff. A substantial gap exists in the literature concerning the current topic in terms of empirical studies and reviews. Therefore, this study aims to shed light on the subject and provide reliable evaluations. Methods: A qualitative case study design (observational) was used. We included the DURs of hospitals in multiple regions of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia/in wards and units of each hospital. To achieve data saturation, visits across wards and ICUs were conducted until no new information was retrieved. NVivo Software version 14 was used for management and analysis of the data. We used our notes to initiate codes and then created themes involving the six steps of thematic analysis for the observational study. Results: Among several main hospitals in the central, western, eastern, southern, and northern geographical locations in Saudi Arabia that included DURs, a total of 24 DURs were explored to capture all relevant aspects related to the observations. Considering the range of items presented in DURs, the majority of hospitals exhibited a substantial lack of equipment. There were disagreements regarding the definition of DURs and the name of DURs. The observers agreed with the practice of urine disposal, which is performed by hand. The observers from all regions mutually agreed that stool disposal methods for patients involved diapers and the cleaning of patients manually with bed sheets. Several risks of infection control were observed related to DUR design and protocols. Conclusions: This national observational study of DURs in Saudi Arabian hospitals revealed major inadequacies in the design, equipment, and processes that are critical for infection control and healthcare quality, emphasizing the critical necessity for standardized methods and appropriate equipment.