Search

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) patients are prone to influenza infection. Seasonal vaccination is the most effective method to prevent influenza. Assessing the influenza coverage and the knowledge and attitude of patients toward it will help in raising the coverage and decreasing the complications. Objectives: To detect the level of influenza vaccination coverage among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and assess the knowledge about influenza infection and attitude toward influenza vaccine among those patients. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study in the diabetes outpatient clinics at Zagazig University hospitals. The study included 327 diabetic patients. It took six months, from February to July 2023. A structured questionnaire was used to assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding seasonal influenza vaccination and factors that may affect them. Results: The mean age of participants was 55.2 years; most of them were female (63.3%). The vaccination coverage was only 23.9%. Sufficient knowledge was reported (64.8%), and a positive attitude toward vaccination among those who had heard about it was reported (69.6%). The main cause of non-vaccination was that they didn't hear about the vaccine (67.8%), while the main cause of vaccination was a doctor's advice (62.8%). After logistic regression, sufficient knowledge and longer disease duration were found to be statistically significant predictors for vaccination (odds ratio 2.117, 1.081 respectively). Conclusions: The influenza vaccination rate among T2DM patients is below the optimal level. Overall, knowledge and attitude toward the influenza vaccine among diabetic patients should be raised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The multisystem manifestations of Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) individuals greatly affect the patients, physical and psychological functioning and impair their capability to take part in work and social activities. This study aimed to explore SLE disease activity, severity and fatigue impacts on their quality of life (Qol). Methods: We conducted this cross-section study on 84 SLE patients who were defined as having SLE by the criteria established by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) in its most recent revision. Assessment of fatigue factors was done via the multidimensional assessment of fatigue (MAF) questionnaire. QoL of the SLE cases was evaluated by the Arabic version of SLE QoL questionnaire. Results: The mean SLEDAS was 16.64±13.59 with (85.7%) of cases had HLDAS and the others (14.3%) had LLDAS. The mean SLEQoL score was 105.69±32.37 and the mean MAF score was 57.24±28.17. Statistically significant differences were found between lupus patients with HLDAS and those with LLDAS as regards fatigue and QoL. Patients with HLDAS group showed higher mean scores of MAF and SLEQoL while no statistically significant differences were found between patients with HLDAS and those with LLDAS as regards age, duration of disease and LSI. Conclusions: The inter-relationships between the assessment indices of activity, severity, fatigue and QoL were studied and revealed strong positive correlations between MAF and both SLEQoL and SLEDAS. There was a moderate positive correlation between SLEDAS and SLEQoL. There were weak positive correlations between LSI and each of the other indices (SLEQoL, SLEDAS and MAF). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that MAF was the only significant associated factor with SLE disease activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2020, global spread of the coronavirus pandemic began. Subsequently, various companies compete to develop numerous vaccines which have shown varying side effects. Assessing menstrual abnormalities post covid -19 vaccination can helpunderstand whether the vaccine might influence menstrual health. We aim to assess the menstrual abnormalities after the COVID-19 vaccination among females working at Zagazig University. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in the medical and administrative sectors at Zagazig University. The study included 346 females in the childbearing period from March to September 2023. A semistructured questionnaire was divided into three sections: demographics, COVID-19 vaccination data, and data about the menstrual cycle. Results: The mean age of participants was 36.76 years. Of them, 67.9% worked in the medical field, and 92.5% received the COVID-19 vaccination. About 43% of vaccinated women subjectively identified changes in their menstrual cycle. There is a statistically significant relationship between change in menstruation after COVID-19 vaccination and the presence of minor adverse effects and the number of doses. Receiving two doses of vaccines nonsignificantly increased the risk of menstrual changes by 1.478 folds, while receiving three doses and experiencing minor adverse effects postvaccination significantly independently increased the risk by 2.531 and 1.625 folds, respectively. Conclusions: About forty percent of vaccinated females reported menstrual changes post-vaccination. COVID-19 vaccination had effect on menstrual health which is linked to vaccination doses and immunologic response to vaccine. We recommend implementing screening programs in family health centers, and to limit number of doses to least effective ones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vaccination against COVID-19 during pregnancy is suggested to avoid pregnancy complications morbidity and bad delivery outcomes. However, the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccinations during pregnancy is a specific issue impacting vaccination uptake by this susceptible group due to alterations in immune, respiratory, and cardiovascular physiology that occur during pregnancy. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between prenatal mother COVID-19 immunization, pregnancy course, and outcomes. Patients and Methods: A retroactive cohort analysis was conducted on all women who gave birth. Women having a previous COVID-19 diagnosis, numerous pregnancies, or an uncertain vaccination status were excluded. Pregnancy, neonatal problems, and delivery were compared with women who got 1 or 2 doses of a vaccine throughout pregnancy and women who did not get any vaccinations. Using multivariable models, the background characteristics were accounted for. Results: The pregnancy complications were higher in unvaccinated group than vaccinated group with no statistical significant difference except stillbirth that was present only in unvaccinated group (3%). Women who were vaccinated gave birth at a significantly later gestational age. No differences between the groups were detected in terms of postpartum and delivery factors. Women who received vaccination delivered at slightly higher birth weight. No differences were detected in terms of neonatal features and problems between the two groups. Conclusions: We concluded that COVID-19-vaccinated pregnant women experienced similar pregnancy outcomes as unvaccinated pregnant women. In some cases, vaccination proved to be better outcome than un-vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]