No abstract

No abstract

SummaryBackgroundSince June, 2012, Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) has, worldwide, caused 104 infections in people including 49 deaths, with 82 cases and 41 deaths reported from Saudi Arabia. In addition to confirming diagnosis, we generated the MERS-CoV genomic sequences obtained directly from patient samples to provide important information on MERS-CoV transmission, evolution, and origin.MethodsFull genome deep sequencing was done on nucleic acid extracted directly from PCR-confirmed clinical samples. Viral genomes were obtained from 21 MERS cases of which 13 had 100%, four 85–95%, and four 30–50% genome coverage. Phylogenetic analysis of the 21 sequences, combined with nine published MERS-CoV genomes, was done.FindingsThree distinct MERS-CoV genotypes were identified in Riyadh. Phylogeographic analyses suggest the MERS-CoV zoonotic reservoir is geographically disperse. Selection analysis of the MERS-CoV genomes reveals the expected accumulation of genetic diversity including changes in the S protein. The genetic diversity in the Al-Hasa cluster suggests that the hospital outbreak might have had more than one virus introduction.InterpretationWe present the largest number of MERS-CoV genomes (21) described so far. MERS-CoV full genome sequences provide greater detail in tracking transmission. Multiple introductions of MERS-CoV are identified and suggest lower R0 values. Transmission within Saudi Arabia is consistent with either movement of an animal reservoir, animal products, or movement of infected people. Further definition of the exposures responsible for the sporadic introductions of MERS-CoV into human populations is urgently needed.FundingSaudi Arabian Ministry of Health, Wellcome Trust, European Community, and National Institute of Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre.

The Saudi Arabian Ministry of Health implemented a pro-active surveillance programme for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronavirus (MERS-CoV). We report MERS-CoV data from 5065 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia individuals who were screened for MERS-CoV over a 12-month period. From 1 October 2012 to 30 September 2013, demographic and clinical data were prospectively collected from all laboratory forms received at the Saudi Arabian Virology reference laboratory. Data were analysed by referral type, age, gender, and MERS-CoV real-time PCR test results. Five thousand and 65 individuals were screened for MER-CoV: hospitalized patients with suspected MERS-CoV infection (n = 2908, 57.4%), healthcare worker (HCW) contacts (n = 1695; 33.5%), and family contacts of laboratory-confirmed MERS cases (n = 462; 9.1%). Eleven per cent of persons tested were children (<17 years of age). There were 108 cases (99 adults and nine children) of MERS-CoV infection detected during the 12-month period (108/5065, 2% case detection rate). Of 108 cases, 45 were females (six children and 39 adults) and 63 were males (three children and 60 adults). Of the 99 adults with MERS-CoV infection, 70 were hospitalized patients, 19 were HCW contacts, and ten were family contacts. There were no significant increases in MERS-CoV detection rates over the 12-month period: 2.6% (19/731) in July 2013, 1.7% (19/1100) in August 2013, and 1.69% (21/1238) in September 2013. Male patients had a significantly higher MERS-CoV infection rate (63/2318, 2.7%) than females (45/2747, 1.6%) (p 0.013). MERS-CoV rates remain at low levels, with no significant increase over time. Pro-active surveillance for MERS-CoV in newly diagnosed patients and their contacts will continue.

Lower respiratory tract samples yield significantly higher MERS-CoV loads and genome fractions than upper respiratory tract samples.

Introduction: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) continues to cause frequent outbreaks in hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Since healthcare workers (HCWs) have a higher risk of acquiring and spreading MERS-CoV, we aimed to evaluate the perceived risk and anxiety level of HCWs in Saudi Arabia regarding MERS. Methodology: An anonymous, self-administered questionnaire was sent online to HCWs at King Khalid University Hospital in Saudi Arabia. The total knowledge and anxiety scores were calculated. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of high anxiety scores. Results: Of 591 (70%) HCWs that responded, 284 (55%), 164 (32%), and 68 (13.2%) were physicians, nurses, and technicians, respectively. Physicians obtained a lower median knowledge score (6/9) compared to other professions (7/9). The mean anxiety score was similar for physicians and other HCWs (3/5); however, non-physicians expressed higher levels of anxiety toward the risk of transmitting MERS-CoV to their families, with an anxiety score of 4/5. The ability of the virus to cause severe disease or death was the most frequently reported reason for worry by physicians (89.7%) and non-physicians (87.2%). Overall, 80% of physicians and 90% of non-physicians reported improvement in adherence to hand hygiene and standard precautions while in hospital (p = 0.002). Concern over transmitting MERS-CoV to family members was the most predictive factor for anxiety among non-physician HCWs. Conclusion: A significant proportion of HCWs expressed anxiety about the risk of acquiring MERS-CoV infection. Healthcare institutions need to develop an integrated psychological response for HCWs to the occupational and psychological challenge of MERS-CoV outbreaks.

MERS-CoV disease is not limited to adults. Most cases of childhood MERS-CoV infection were asymptomatic and tested positive during contact investigation of older patients. Severe disease can occur in children with underlying conditions.

Objectives: To quantify parental acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine and assess the vaccine hesitancy (VH) for COVID-19 vs. childhood vaccines.Methods: Eight vaccine hesitancy scale (VHS) items, adopted from WHO's Strategic Advisory Group of Immunization (SAGE), were used to assess VH for COVID-19 vaccine vs. routine childhood vaccines. We distributed the online survey to parents with the commence of the national childhood COVID-19 vaccination program in Saudi Arabia.Results: Among 3,167 parents, 47.6% are decided to vaccinate their children against COVID-19. The most common reasons for refusal were inadequate safety information (69%) and worry about side effects (60.6%). Parents have a significantly greater positive attitudes toward children's routine vaccines vs. the COVID-19 vaccine, with higher mean VHS (±SD) = 2.98 ± 0.58 vs. 2.63 ± 0.73, respectively (p-value &lt; 0.001). Parents agreed more that routine childhood vaccines are more essential and effective as compared to the COVID-19 vaccine (Cohen's D: 0.946, and 0.826, consecutively; T-test p-value &lt; 0.00). There is more parental anxiety about serious side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine vs. routine childhood vaccines (Cohen's D = 0.706, p-value &lt; 0.001). Parents who relied on the Ministry of Health information were more predicted (OR = 1.28, p-value = 0.035) to intend to vaccinate as opposed to those who used the WHO website (OR = 0.47, −53%, p-value &lt; 0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, the factors associated with intention to vaccinate children were parents who received COVID-19 vaccine, older parents, having children aged 12–18, and parents with lower education levels.Conclusions: Significant proportion of parents are hesitant about the COVID-19 vaccine because they are less confident in its effectiveness, safety, and whether it is essential for their children. Relying on the national official healthcare authority's website for the source of information was associated with increased acceptance of childhood COVID-19 vaccination. As parental intention to vaccinate children against COVID-19 is suboptimal, healthcare authorities could boost vaccine uptake by campaigns targeting hesitant parents.