Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, is a major international crisis. Although vaccination is the only hope to end this pandemic, adverse effects attributable to vaccines are still being reported. Active surveillance is critical for generating near-real-time, high-quality evidence for potential safety hazards, allowing us to respond quickly to vaccination Purpose To investigate the prevalence of side effects following COVID-19 vaccination with Oxford–AstraZeneca among adults in northwestern Riyadh Province, Saudi Arabia. Methods This is a cross-sectional and community-based study performed among individuals who had received any type of COVID-19 vaccination. A convenience sampling method was used to collect data using an online survey. Results A total of 222 individuals responded to the survey, and the majority frequently reported both localized and systemic side effects after vaccination. The most reported side effects include pain at the site of injection, myalgia, headache, and fever. Some demographic factors were significantly associated with the reported post-vaccination side effects. Conclusion The most prevalent side effects experienced by individuals after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were determined in this study. Prior to the administration of a vaccination, counseling programs should be established to help people understand and deal with the possible side effects, with a special focus on demographic differences.

BackgroundNurses usually provide direct patient care. However, they account for the majority of healthcare workers (HCWs) injured by needles or other sharp objects.ObjectivesTo assess the prevalence of needle stick injuries (NSI) among nurses worldwide; according to WHO regions, the socioeconomic development index (SDI) of countries, and the developmental status of individual countries, and in the Middle East.DesignSystematic review and meta‐analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. We calculated the pooled NSI prevalence estimates using a random‐effect meta‐analysis with the Comprehensive Meta‐Analysis software. The report of the study was in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement.ResultsThe overall worldwide NSI prevalence pooled from our analysis was 40.97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 31.29–50.63%, p = .00001). A subgroup analysis of NSI prevalence according to WHO regions revealed the highest prevalence in Southeast Asia (49.9%, 95% CI: [23.4–76.3%]) and the lowest in the United States of America (25.1%, 95% CI: [18.1–32.1%]), respectively. The pooled prevalence in developed and developing countries was 30.5% (95% CI: 27.3–33.8%) and 46.6% (95% CI: 33.7–59.5%), respectively. According to the SDI, NSI prevalence was highest in low‐middle SDI countries (48.9% [95% CI: 30.7–67.2%]).ConclusionOur results showed a high NSI prevalence among nurses worldwide. Developing countries had a significantly higher NSI prevalence than developed countries, especially low‐middle SDI countries.Relevance to Clinical PracticeThis study highlighted the prevalence of NSI risk among nurses practising in clinical settings worldwide. The study findings suggest that continuous training programs should be implemented for nurses to enhance their knowledge, performance and attitude toward NSI prevention in clinical settings.No Patient or Public ContributionContributions from patients or the public are irrelevant because the purpose of this study was to examine the global prevalence of NSIs in nurses.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global public health threat that has spread rapidly and caused morbidity and mortality worldwide. Reducing the myths about infectious diseases is vital for controlling transmission. This study explored the level of misconceptions and associated factors of COVID-19 among internally displaced persons in Sudan. This study is a cross-sectional, descriptive design and community-based study. We collected the data using a self-administered questionnaire via the convenience sampling technique among internally displaced persons in the camps of Zalingei town in the central Darfur region of Sudan. The total mean score of the respondents’ misconception was 3.1725 (SD=0.59) with 63.2%, indicating moderate misunderstanding of COVID-19. Multiple linear regression revealed the independent variables together had a significant impact on a misconception, F(14,116)=2.429, p<0.005. The regression model explains 22.7% of the variance in misunderstanding. Analysis of the influence of single factors on the dependent variable showed that people aged 31–40 years had significantly higher levels of misconception, 0.381 (t=2.116, p<0.037), than those aged over 60 years, and university graduates had considerably lower levels of misunderstanding, −0.061 (t=−2.091, p<0.03) than non-graduates. This study found a moderate level of misconception of COVID-19. Non-graduates had higher levels of misunderstanding than graduates. The results suggest that an education campaign should focus on people with low levels of education to correct their misconceptions regarding the prevention of COVID-19 infection.

Introduction Stroke is a significant health problem and is considered one of the leading causes of mortality and permanent disability worldwide. Hypertension is a primary risk factor for stroke. Thus, hypertensive patients’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) are essential in preventing stroke. Objective To examine hypertensive patients’ KAP towards stroke prevention among rural population in Saudi Arabia. Methods The study utilized a cross-sectional design. The data were collected using a convenience sampling technique from hypertensive patients in the northwestern rural areas of Riyadh Province. A self-administered questionnaire was adapted from the Stroke Recognition Questionnaire (SRQ) and utilized to assess KAP towards stroke prevention among rural hypertensive patients. The STrengthening of the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist was used to report the study. Results A total of 196 hypertensive patients participated in the study. The total mean scores categorization into three quartiles showed that most respondents had poor levels of KAP towards stroke prevention. Weak positive correlations were found between KAP of patients. There were statistically significant differences between respondents’ attitudes and practices with their age, education, marital status, and occupational status. Discussion This study denoted poor levels of KAP towards stroke prevention among hypertensive patients living in rural areas. This study showed the importance of further considering rural population by which improving their health and quality of life. Extending health educational programs and behavior-changing strategies to rural areas is essential to increase hypertensive patients and general public awareness about their stroke prevention and other health-related concerns.