{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024824952259707194, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01782304264799491, 'mean_word_length': 5.338709677419355, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prophylactic use of Hydroxychloroquine among Physicians working in Pandemic Hospitals


 Background: Throughout the pandemic, physicians working at the frontlines have embarked on various quests to protect themselves, and many physicians preferred the use of hydroxychloroquine (HQN) as a prophylactic agent. This study aimed to investigate the reasons leading physicians to use HQN and the effects of HQN use on physicians.Methods: This study is a cross-sectional study with a target population of physicians working in pandemic hospitals in İstanbul, Turkey. We have recruited the participants from seven different hospitals via an invitation email between May 14 and June 13, 2020. An online questionnaire, including 57 questions in total, was sent to each physician.Results: A total of 148 (26%) physicians used hydroxychloroquine for prevention. Older physicians and ones who have a story of exposure to COVID-19 patients without any protection used more prophylactic HQN. Hydroxychloroquine did not differ statistically in terms of being infected among the exposed physicians (p=0.52). Nineteen (13%) physicians using hydroxychloroquine developed side effects related to the drug. Diarrhea and nausea were the most common.Conclusion: Prophylactic HQN use was more common among the physicians older than 40 years and who had higher exposure rates to a COVID-19 patient without any protection. The physicians working at the frontlines had the highest rate of infection. Hydroxychloroquine was not effective in the prophylaxis of COVID-19 among the exposed physicians.