Axillary and rectal thermometry in the newborn: do they agree?

BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of body temperature is critical for the assessment of a newborn’s general well-being. In nursery settings, the gold standard rectal thermometry has been replaced by the axillary method. However, evidence pertaining to the agreement between axillary and rectal thermometry in the newborn is controversial. In this cross-sectional study, the agreement between axillary and rectal temperature in newborns, as well as the effects of neonatal, maternal and environmental factors on this agreement were investigated. METHODS: The mean difference between axillary and rectal temperatures was compared in stable term and preterm newborns using paired t-test for the means of differences, Pearson correlation coefficient (r), and the Bland-Altman plot. Stepwise multivariate regression assessed predictors of this difference in the overall group and by gestational age categories. RESULTS: The study included 118 newborns with gestational ages ranging from 29 to 41 weeks, median birth weight of 2980 grams (IQR: 2321.3-3363.8). Axillary and rectal temperatures correlated significantly (r = 0.5, p = 0.000) and had similar overall means but differed in 34–36 weeks gestation newborns (p = 0.01). Correlation between both methods increased with advancing gestational age being highest in term newborns (r = 0.6, p = 0.000). Bland-Altman plots revealed good agreement in gestational ages above 29 weeks. The difference between measurements increased with Cesarean delivery (ß = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.38), but decreased with advancing chronological age (ß = -0.01; 95% CI: -0.02,-0.01), and with gestational age (ß = -0.05; 95% CI: -0.08,-0.01). CONCLUSION: In clinically stable term and preterm infants, axillary thermometry is as reliable as rectal measurement. Predictors of agreement between the two methods include gestational age, chronological age and mode of delivery. Further studies are needed to confirm this agreement in sick newborns and in extremely premature infants

Knowledge, Perception, Attitudes and Behavior on Influenza Immunization and the Determinants of Vaccination

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the knowledge of, perception, attitudes, and behaviors toward influenza virus and immunization, and the determinants of vaccination among students, patients, and Healthcare Workers (HCWs) at the American University of Beirut and its affiliated Medical Center. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study between October 2016 and January 2017 utilizing a self-administered questionnaire that was provided to 247 randomly selected adult participants. Data collected included socio-demographic characteristics, prior vaccination against influenza, knowledge, perception, attitudes, and behaviors toward influenza and influenza immunization. A multivariable regression model was used to evaluate for independent associations between the different variables and regular or yearly vaccination as a primary outcome. RESULTS: The overall survey response rate was 77%. A substantial proportion of respondents (47.4%) had never received the influenza vaccine. Only 10.2% of students, 19.1% of patients, and 35.6% of HCWs reported regular or yearly influenza vaccine uptake. HCWs had the lowest knowledge score about influenza and its vaccine despite high self-reported levels of knowledge. Barriers to vaccinations included lack of information (31%), fear of adverse effects (29%), and a perception of not being at risk (23%). Several factors were independently associated with regular or yearly vaccination uptake including having children (adjusted OR = 3.8; 95% CI 1.2-12.5), a "very good" self-reported level of knowledge (OR = 16.3; 95% CI 1.4-194.2) and being afraid of the consequences of influenza (OR = 0.2; 95% CI 0.1-0.6). CONCLUSION: Adherence rates with regular or yearly vaccination against influenza remain low across all study groups. We were able to identify predictors as well as barriers to vaccination. Future awareness and vaccination campaigns should specifically aim at correcting misconceptions about vaccination, particularly among HCWs, along with addressing the barriers to vaccination. Predictors of vaccination should be integrated in the design of future campaigns

Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Cross-Sectional Study in Three Communities in the United States and Lebanon

The COVID-19 pandemic underscores the significance of vaccine hesitancy in shaping vaccination outcomes. Understanding the factors underpinning COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy is crucial for tailoring effective vaccination strategies. This cross-sectional study, conducted in three communities across the United States and Lebanon, employed surveys to assess respondents’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions regarding COVID-19 infection and vaccination. Among the 7196 participants, comprising 6775 from the US and 422 from Lebanon, vaccine hesitancy rates were comparable at 12.2% and 12.8%, respectively. Notably, a substantial proportion of respondents harbored misconceptions, such as attributing the potential to alter DNA (86.4%) or track individuals (92.8%) to COVID-19 vaccines and believing in the virus’s artificial origins (81%). US participants had more misconceptions about the COVID-19 vaccine, such as altering DNA or causing infertility. Lebanese participants were more likely to question the origins of the virus and the speed of vaccine development. Additionally, US respondents were less worried about infection, while Lebanese respondents were more indecisive but less likely to outright reject the vaccine. Primary determinants of hesitancy included perceptions that the vaccine poses a greater risk than the infection itself (aOR = 8.7 and 9.4, respectively) and negative recommendations from healthcare providers (aOR = 6.5 and 5.4, respectively). Conversely, positive endorsements from healthcare providers were associated with reduced hesitancy (aOR = 0.02 and 0.4, respectively). Targeting healthcare providers to dispel misinformation and elucidate COVID-19 vaccine risks holds promise for enhancing vaccination uptake