Physicians’ knowledge and attitudes in Saudi Arabia regarding implantable cardiac defibrillators

Objectives: To evaluate knowledge and attitude of physicians involved in the management of patients with heart failure regarding implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Methods: We conducted personal interviews with physicians involved in treating patients with heart failure. Between October 2015 and February 2016, the study was conducted in hospitals in the Riyadh region where no cardiac electrophysiology service was available. Every participant was met in person and received an oral questionnaire that aimed to assess basic knowledge regarding ICD indications and benefits. Results: Sixty-three physicians were met from 13 hospitals (14 consultants and 49 specialists). Forty-one percent of participants use the recommended cut-off level of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) which is ≤35% as the LVEF criterion for ICD referral in patients with cardiomyopathy. Only 50% of the consultants use ≤35% as the LVEF criterion for ICD referral. Seventy percent of the participants thought that ICD may improve heart failure symptoms. Forty-eight percent of physicians have a defined channel to refer patients to higher centers for ICD implant. There was no statistically significant difference between physicians’ knowledge when we categorized them according to three different factors: (1) physician’s specialty (cardiology vs. internal medicine); (2) physician’s degree (consultant vs. specialist); and (3) physician’s location (inside vs. outside Riyadh city). Conclusion: There is a lack of knowledge of current clinical guidelines regarding ICD implantation for patients with heart failure at general hospitals in Saudi Arabia. This finding highlights the need to improve the dissemination of guidelines to practitioners involved in managing patients with heart failure in an effort to improve ICD utilization. Keywords: Cardiac defibrillator, Heart failure, Physicians’ knowledge, Saudi Arabi

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

Background: Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling. Methods: The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty. Results: NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year. Conclusion: As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population