Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is the most effective protective measure to control the spread of infections and provide protection against hospitalization and mortality during the pandemic. There was a necessity to measure public knowledge and acceptance for COVID-19 vaccines in different countries. Thus, the current study is aimed at evaluating the knowledge, attitude, and practice of the population in all regions of Saudi towards COVID-19 vaccination. This was a cross-sectional, online self-reported survey of Saudi residents that was conducted between March 2021 and April 2021. To be eligible for the study, participants had to be above 18 years old. All participants were adult, Arabic speakers and residents of Saudi Arabia. In total, 1658 adults participated in this study and showed high knowledge (81.8%), attitude (71.2%), and practice (59.3%). The level of knowledge, attitude, and practice differed based on different demographic characteristics. Regression analysis showed that having a low income, low education level, and middle-aged status, living in a village, and being married were associated with lower scores in knowledge, attitude, or practice. Targeted education and campaigns should be provided for these populations to increase their knowledge, attitude, and practice towards COVID-19 vaccination.

Background: Brucellosis is a major zoonotic infection that warrants treatment with antibiotic therapy. Current treatment recommendations include using either dual or triple therapy with antibiotics active against brucella species. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of dual and triple antibiotic therapy for treating brucellosis. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study for patients with confirmed Brucellosis infection from 2015 to 2024. The primary outcome was the achievement of a favorable response. Secondary outcomes were treatment failure, 90-day mortality, relapse of brucella infection, hospital re-admission, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Baseline characteristics were reported as means with standard deviations. All the statistical tests are shown as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: In total, 966 patients were screened and 287 met the inclusion criteria: 164 patients in the dual therapy group and 123 patients in the triple therapy group. Achievement of a favorable response was not statistically different between the dual therapy and triple therapy groups; 87.3% vs. 90.5%, OR 1.2 (0.48–3.02, p = 0.42). No patient died in either treatment group. Treatment failure, mean duration of hospitalization, brucella relapse, hospital re-admission, and the mean time to defervescence were not statistically different between dual and triple therapy groups. Adverse drug reactions were numerically higher in the triple therapy group. Conclusions: Dual therapy was equally effective for the treatment of patients with brucellosis compared to the triple therapy regimens. Although not statistically significant, there more ADRs in the triple therapy group compared to those receiving dual therapy. Thus, dual antibiotic therapy is efficacious, less costly, and associated with fewer ADRs compared to triple antibiotic therapy.

Background: Remdesivir is associated with hepatotoxicity and acute kidney injury (AKI). The objective of this study was to assess the hepatotoxicity and AKI with remdesivir. Method: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study for adult patients who used remdesivir for COVID-19 from 3/2020 to 10/2021. The study was conducted at Rhode Island Hospital, Rhode Island, United States. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics as well as logistic regression analysis using STATA 18. Results: A total of 1635 patients were evaluated for hepatotoxicity: 337 developed hepatotoxicity, and 1298 had normal hepatic function. The overall median frequency of hepatotoxicity occurred in 319 patients (19.5%). Patient age (OR 1.02, 95% CI: 1–1.04, p = 0.02) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) use (OR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.1–2.6, p = 0.01) were potential risk factors for remdesivir-associated hepatotoxicity. In contrast, being male gender was protective against remdesivir-associated hepatotoxicity (OR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47–0.87, p = 0.02). The frequency of AKI with remdesivir occurred in 280 patients (17.3%). Conclusions: The frequency of hepatotoxicity was 19.5%, and the frequency of AKI was 17.3%. Increasing age and using SSRIs were risk factors for remdesivir-associated hepatotoxicity, while male gender was a protective factor. Clinicians should vigilantly monitor hepatic and renal functions for patients using remdesivir, especially in elderly patients.

The use of Electronic Prescribing (ePrescribing) platforms in prescribing, dispensing and claiming medications has become a trend worldwide. The utilization of this technology contributes to safer, more efficient, and satisfactory patient care. However, the experience and perspective of family physicians regarding this platform were not sufficiently evaluated in Saudi Arabia. Thus, this study aims to explore the perspectives, usage patterns, and perceived impacts of an ePrescribing platform, named Wasfaty, which has been adopted in primary healthcare centers by family physicians in Hail region in Saudi Arabia. A qualitative study was conducted using online semi-structured interviews which took place from March to September 2024. By using purposive sampling, we interviewed 12 out of 69 licensed family physicians working in different primary healthcare centers at Hail region. Five key themes (i.e., registration and adoption, quality of clinical documentation, patient safety, perspectives, and recommendation) and open questions were identified through a comprehensive literature search and consensus among researchers to assess the users' experiences and perspectives toward and impacts of the use of the ePrescribing platform in the primary healthcare centers. Thematic analysis used descriptive and inductive approaches. The study revealed that the registration process of family physicians to the portal was straightforward. Although there were no orientation or regular training sessions after the registration, the usability and simplicity were positive. The physicians normally continued using the portal during the workday without automatic log-out during inactivity mode. The impacts of using the portal on the comprehensiveness, accuracy, and reliability of clinical documentation were optimistic. The portal supported the continuity of care for chronic disease conditions. It improved the dosage accuracy, reduced medication errors and eliminated drug-drug interactions when compared to traditional prescribing. Physicians preferred to be continuously updated about new information and features and suggested the incorporation of artificial intelligence into the portal. The overall experience of family physicians was positive and their perspectives toward this digital transformation are optimistic. Findings of this study asserted the inclusion of physicians in the early phase of eHealth application development. Results may be limited by the purposive sampling method and restricted generalizability to other healthcare settings. Further research is needed to expand the adoption of ePrescribing services in all Saudi healthcare centers and to improve the user experience with the electronic prescribing service worldwide.

Background/Objectives: Saudi Health consumers increasingly rely on generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) to access health information from a growing number of health-related resources. Little is known about the frequency and patterns of generative AI tool use for seeking health information among consumers, its reported impact, and health consumers’ perceptions of these tools. This study aims to investigate the use of and perspectives on generative AI tools among health consumers in Saudi Arabia (SA). It also aims to assess the impact of their use on health-seeking behaviours. Methods: An exploratory, cross-sectional, self-administered online survey was distributed to adults (≥18 years) residing in SA during two data collection rounds in 2026 (March–April and July–August). All adults who used generative AI tools to seek online health information in the past year were included. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to examine relationships among variables. Results: A total of 403 eligible health consumers (58% male) participated. Among respondents who had used generative AI for health purposes, approximately 49% reported using it more than five times per month. Younger age, higher income, and more frequent pre-use were associated with higher odds of frequent seeking health information behaviour. Headache, abdominal pain, and musculoskeletal pain were the most common claims. ChatGPT was the main platform (84%) used for seeking information. Age was significantly negatively associated with frequency, whereas income and pre-visit use were positively associated. The primary reasons for seeking health information via generative AI were quick information retrieval (71%), time saving (34%), and curiosity (30.5%). Conclusions: The high frequency of use suggests that generative AI can serve as a source of health information and may lead users to withhold health information from healthcare providers. It may influence subsequent health-seeking behaviours, such as requesting urgent care or postponing physician visits. These self-reported findings do not establish diagnostic accuracy, clinical effectiveness, or patient safety, and the clinical risk and appropriateness of self-management actions were not assessed. Many respondents reported concerns about inaccurate information, missed serious illness, and increased health anxiety.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is frequently complicated by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), which is associated with high mortality. The lactate-to-albumin ratio (LAR) and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (CAR) have been proposed as prognostic markers in critical illness, but their comparative performance in COVID-19–associated ARDS is not well established. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the MIMIC-IV database, which contains data from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, United States, including COVID-19 ICU admissions from 2020 to 2022. Adult COVID-19 patients with available PaO₂/FiO₂, lactate, albumin, and C-reactive protein measurements within the first 48 h of ICU admission were included. Receiver operating characteristic analysis, Kaplan–Meier survival analysis, and Cox proportional hazards regression were performed. Results: Of the 3620 patients screened, 66 met the inclusion criteria; 36 survived and 30 died. Non-survivors had significantly higher LAR and CAR values at ICU admission. In ROC analyses, LAR demonstrated moderate discrimination for 30-day mortality (AUC 0.706) and showed higher discriminatory performance than CAR in most subgroup analyses. Among ARDS patients, LAR showed moderate predictive ability (AUC 0.693), compared with CAR (AUC 0.655). In severe ARDS, both markers demonstrated improved discrimination (0.722 AUC for LAR and 0.797 for CAR). High LAR was associated with significantly higher 30-day mortality in all ARDS patients (60.5% vs. 24.0%; p = 0.0056) and severe ARDS patients (72.0% vs. 20.0%; p = 0.0022). Elevated CAR was also associated with increased mortality, particularly in severe ARDS (73.1% vs. 14.3%; p < 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression, LAR remained independently associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusions: LAR demonstrated independent prognostic value for 30-day mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients with ARDS. CAR showed variable performance. These readily available biomarkers, particularly LAR, may aid early risk stratification although larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.