Browsing by Author "Musallam, Rami"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Evaluation of COVID-19 Vaccine Attitudes among Arab American Healthcare Professionals Living in the United States
    (MDPI, 2021-08-24) Shallal, Anita; Abada, Evi; Musallam, Rami; Fehmi, Omar; Kaljee, Linda; Fehmi, Ziad; Alzouhayli, Suma; Ujayli, Deema; Dankerlui, Doreen; Kim, Seongho; Cote, Michele L.; Kumar, Vijaya Arun; Zervos, Marcus; Ali-Fehmi, Rouba; Epidemiology, Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health
    Background: Vaccine hesitancy is the next great barrier for public health. Arab Americans are a rapidly growing demographic in the United States with limited information on the prevalence of vaccine hesitancy. We therefore sought to study the attitudes towards the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine amongst Arab American health professionals living in the United States. Methods: This was a cross sectional study utilizing an anonymous online survey. The survey was distributed via e-mail to National Arab American Medical Association members and Arab-American Center for Economic and Social Services healthcare employees. Respondents were considered vaccine hesitant if they selected responses other than a willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Results: A total of 4000 surveys were sent via e-mail from 28 December 2020 to 31 January 2021, and 513 responses were received. The highest group of respondents were between the ages of 18-29 years and physicians constituted 48% of the respondents. On multivariable analysis, we found that respondents who had declined an influenza vaccine in the preceding 5 years (p < 0.001) and allied health professionals (medical assistants, hospital administrators, case managers, researchers, scribes, pharmacists, dieticians and social workers) were more likely to be vaccine hesitant (p = 0.025). In addition, respondents earning over $150,000 US dollars annually were less likely to be vaccine hesitant and this finding was significant on multivariable analysis (p = 0.011). Conclusions: Vaccine hesitancy among health care providers could have substantial impact on vaccine attitudes of the general population, and such data may help inform vaccine advocacy efforts.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Impact of positive cytology in uterine serous carcinoma: A reassessment
    (Elsevier, 2021-07-12) Corey, Logan; Fucinari, Juliana; Elshaikh, Mohamed; Schultz, Daniel; Musallam, Rami; Zaiem, Feras; Daaboul, Fayez; Fehmi, Omar; Dyson, Greg; Ruterbusch, Julie; Morris, Robert; Cote, Michelle L.; Ali-Fehmi, Rouba; Bandyopadhyay, Sudeshna; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of peritoneal cytology status among other clinicopathological parameters in uterine serous carcinoma (USC). Methods: A retrospective study of 148 patients diagnosed with uterine serous carcinoma from 1997 to 2016 at two academic medical centers in the Detroit metropolitan area was done. A central gynecologic pathologist reviewed all available slides and confirmed the histologic diagnosis of each case of USC. We assessed the prognostic impact of various clinicopathological parameters on overall survival (OS) and endometrial cancer-specific survival (ECSS). Those parameters included race, body mass index (BMI), stage at diagnosis, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion (LVSI), peritoneal cytology status, receipt of adjuvant treatment, and comorbidity count using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). We used Cox proportional hazards models and 95% confidence intervals for statistical analysis. Results: Positive peritoneal cytology had a statistically significant effect on OS (HR: 2.09, 95% CI: [1.19, 3.68]) and on ECSS (HR: 2.02, 95% CI: [1.06 - 3.82]). LVSI had a statistically significant effect on both OS (HR: 2.27, 95% CI: [1.14, 4.53]) and ECSS (HR: 3.45, 95% CI: [1.49, 7.99]). Black or African American (AA) race was also found to have a significant effect on both OS (HR: 1.92, 95% CI: [1.07, 3.47]) and ECSS (HR: 2.01, 95% CI: [1.02, 3.98]). Other factors including BMI and tumor size > 1 cm did not show a statistically significant impact on OS or ECSS. Conclusions: Peritoneal washings with positive cytology and LVSI are important prognostic tools that may have a significant impact on overall survival in USC and can be used as independent negative prognosticators to help guide adjuvant treatment.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in liver cirrhosis: a systematic review with meta-analysis of 51,834 patients
    (Taylor & Francis, 2023-01-17) Beran, Azizullah; Mhanna, Asmaa; Mhanna, Mohammed; Hassouneh, Ramzi; Abuhelwa, Ziad; Mohamed, Mouhand F. H.; Sayeh, Wasef; Musallam, Rami; Assaly, Ragheb; Abdeljawad, Khaled; Medicine, School of Medicine
    SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations were found to be highly effective in phase 3 clinical trials. However, these trials have not reported data regarding the subgroup of liver disease or excluded patients with liver disease. The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among liver cirrhosis (LC) patients is unclear. We conducted this meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in LC patients. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to include all the relevant studies that compared the outcomes of LC patients who received SARS-CoV-2 vaccines vs. unvaccinated patients. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model. Four studies with 51,834 LC patients (20,689 patients received at least one dose vs 31,145 were unvaccinated) were included. COVID-19–related complications, including hospitalization (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.91, P = 0.004), mortality (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16–0.55, P = 0.0001), and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11–0.77, P = 0.01), were significantly lower in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in LC patients reduced COVID-19–related mortality, intubation, and hospitalization. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is highly effective in LC. Further prospective studies, preferably randomized controlled trials, are necessary to validate our findings and determine which vaccine is superior in patients with LC.