Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented changes globally, significantly affecting public health sectors, including paediatric road trauma. This study aims to explore the changes in paediatric road trauma presentations and outcomes before and after the COVID-19 lockdown., Methods: This retrospective study analysed paediatric trauma data from the Saudi TraumA Registry (STAR) from August 2017 to December 2022, comparing pre- and post-COVID-19 lockdown periods (August 2017-March 2020 and July 2020-December 2022, respectively). The study analysed demographic data, mechanism of injury, severity, ICU admissions, and mortality rates using multivariate logistic regression models., Results: Out of 950 paediatric trauma cases analysed, there was an 44.2 [561/389 = 1.442] % increase in the number of cases post-lockdown. A significant shift was noted in the age group of 5-9 years, with cases increasing from post-lockdown. Head injuries were the most prevalent type of injury, with their proportion slightly increasing from 163 (20.5%) pre-lockdown to 248 (23.2%) post-lockdown. The ICU admission were consistent across both periods, while the definitive care mode of arrival post-lockdown showed a notable shift towards private or government ambulances., Conclusion: Our study provides critical insights into the significant impact of the COVID-19 on paediatric road trauma. The observed increase in trauma cases post-pandemic, particularly among younger children and a notable rise in driver-related injuries among adolescents, underscores the profound effect of lockdown measures and subsequent societal changes on paediatric health. Efforts to reduce paediatric traffic injuries require collaboration among parents, educators, healthcare professionals, policymakers, and the community at large., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Lockdown restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic have reduced the number of injuries recorded. However, little is known about the impact of easing COVID-19 lockdown restrictions on the nature and outcome of injuries. This study aims to compare injury patterns prior to and after the easing of COVID-19 lockdown restrictions in Saudi Arabia., Method: Data were collected retrospectively from the Saudi TraumA Registry for the period between March 25, 2019, and June 21, 2021. These data corresponded to three periods: March 2019-February 2020 (pre-restrictions, period 1), March 2020-June 2020 (lockdown, period 2), and July 2020-June 2021 (post easing of restrictions, period 3). Data related to patients' demographics, mechanism and severity of injury, and in-hospital mortality were collected and analysed., Results: A total of 5,147 traumatic injury patients were included in the analysis (pre-restrictions n = 2593; lockdown n = 218; post easing of lockdown restrictions n = 2336). An increase in trauma cases (by 7.6%) was seen in the 30-44 age group after easing restrictions (n = 648 vs. 762, p < 0.01). Motor vehicle crashes (MVC) were the leading cause of injury, followed by falls in all the three periods. MVC-related injuries decreased by 3.1% (n = 1068 vs. 890, p = 0.03) and pedestrian-related injuries decreased by 2.7% (n = 227 vs. 143, p < 0.01); however, burn injuries increased by 2.2% (n = 134 vs. 174, p < 0.01) and violence-related injuries increased by 0.9% (n = 45 vs. 60, p = 0.05) post easing of lockdown restrictions. We observed an increase in in-hospital mortality during the period of 12 months after easing of lockdown restrictions-4.9% (114/2336) compared to 12 months of pre-lockdown period-4.3% (113/2593)., Conclusion: This is one of the first studies to document trauma trends over a one-year period after easing lockdown restrictions. MVC continues to be the leading cause of injuries despite a slight decrease; overall injury cases rebounded towards pre-lockdown levels in Saudi Arabia. Injury prevention needs robust legislation with respect to road safety measures and law enforcement that can decrease the burden of traumatic injuries., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: While literature on psychological consequences among frontline healthcare workers (HCWs) flourishes, understanding the psychological burden on this group is particularly crucial, as their exposure to COVID-19 makes them especially at high risk. We explored what is known about psychological effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on emergency HCWs., Methods: We used a scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews., Results: The search identified 5432 articles, from which a total of 21 were included in the final review. Anxiety, burnout, depression, inadequate sleep, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, distress/stress and secondary trauma, were all reportedly experienced by emergency HCWs. Anxiety, burnout, depression and stress levels were higher among physicians and nurses compared to others. Post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms were higher among reserve medics, while Red Cross volunteers developed similar reactions of psychological stress and secondary trauma to other healthcare workers. Male HCWs reported more post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms than females, while stress was higher among females than male HCWs., Conclusions: Emergency HCWs providing care during the COVID-19 pandemic are at risk from specific psychological impacts, including anxiety, burnout, depression, inadequate sleep, PTSD symptoms, psychological distress/stress and secondary trauma, and stress TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Emergency healthcare workers are at direct risk of psychological impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest relevant to this article., (Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The current pandemic of COVID-19 impacted the psychological wellbeing of populations globally., Objectives: We aimed to examine the extent and identify factors associated with psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study across 17 countries during Jun-2020 to Jan-2021. Levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), fear of COVID-19 (Fear of COVID-19 Scale), and coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale) were assessed., Results: A total of 8,559 people participated; mean age (±SD) was 33(±13) years, 64% were females and 40% self-identified as frontline workers. More than two-thirds (69%) experienced moderate-to-very high levels of psychological distress, which was 46% in Thailand and 91% in Egypt. A quarter (24%) had high levels of fear of COVID-19, which was as low as 9% in Libya and as high as 38% in Bangladesh. More than half (57%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping; the lowest prevalence (3%) was reported in Australia and the highest (72%) in Syria. Being female (AOR 1.31 [95% CIs 1.09-1.57]), perceived distress due to change of employment status (1.56 [1.29-1.90]), comorbidity with mental health conditions (3.02 [1.20-7.60]) were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and fear. Doctors had higher psychological distress (1.43 [1.04-1.97]), but low levels of fear of COVID-19 (0.55 [0.41-0.76]); nurses had medium to high resilient coping (1.30 [1.03-1.65])., Conclusions: The extent of psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping varied by country; however, we identified few higher risk groups who were more vulnerable than others. There is an urgent need to prioritise health and well-being of those people through well-designed intervention that may need to be tailored to meet country specific requirements., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

(1) Background: COVID-19 caused the worst international public health crisis, accompanied by major global economic downturns and mass-scale job losses, which impacted the psychosocial wellbeing of the worldwide population, including Saudi Arabia. Evidence of the high-risk groups impacted by the pandemic has been non-existent in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, this study examined factors associated with psychosocial distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping strategies among the general population in Saudi Arabia. (2) Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in healthcare and community settings in the Saudi Arabia using an anonymous online questionnaire. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K-10), Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S) and Brief Resilient Coping Scale (BRCS) were used to assess psychological distress, fear and coping strategies, respectively. Multivariate logistic regressions were used, and an Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) was reported. (3) Results: Among 803 participants, 70% (n = 556) were females, and the median age was 27 years; 35% (n = 278) were frontline or essential service workers; and 24% (n = 195) reported comorbid conditions including mental health illness. Of the respondents, 175 (21.8%) and 207 (25.8%) reported high and very high psychological distress, respectively. Factors associated with moderate to high levels of psychological distress were: youth, females, non-Saudi nationals, those experiencing a change in employment or a negative financial impact, having comorbidities, and current smoking. A high level of fear was reported by 89 participants (11.1%), and this was associated with being ex-smokers (3.72, 1.14–12.14, 0.029) and changes in employment (3.42, 1.91–6.11, 0.000). A high resilience was reported by 115 participants (14.3%), and 333 participants (41.5%) had medium resilience. Financial impact and contact with known/suspected cases (1.63, 1.12–2.38, 0.011) were associated with low, medium, to high resilient coping. (4) Conclusions: People in Saudi Arabia were at a higher risk of psychosocial distress along with medium-high resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic, warranting urgent attention from healthcare providers and policymakers to provide specific mental health support strategies for their current wellbeing and to avoid a post-pandemic mental health crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]