The cost of primary care: An experience analysis in an urban setting

Objectives@#PhilHealth’s present health benefit scheme is largely centered on in-patient services. This inadvertently incentivizes hospital admissions for increased access to benefit coverage. To address this problem, this study proposes a costing method to comprehensively finance outpatient care. The objective of this paper is to estimate an annual primary care benefit package (PCBP) cost based on experience analysis (actual benefit usage) on the first year of implementation at an urban pilot site. @*Methods@#A cost analysis was conducted to assess a disease-agnostic primary care benefit package for an urban outpatient government facility over the first year of implementation. Costing information was gathered through staff interviews, accounting documents, and usage data from the electronic health records system available on-site. @*Results@#The annual primary care cost was defined as the estimated financial coverage for eligible employees and their eligible dependents (n=15,051). The annual utilization rate for consultations was reported at 51%. Of patients who consulted, approximately 38% accessed free available diagnostic procedures and 48% availed of free available medicines. Based on these usage rates, the annual primary care cost for the first year was computed at PhP 403.22 per capita. @*Conclusion@#Our study shows that on the first year of coverage in a government run urban outpatient facility, an allocation of PhP 403.22 per capita can allow coverage for a disease-agnostic package (comprehensive); this amount excludes out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the target population of this study. This amount is feasible only when coopted with opportunistic registration, reduction of untargeted check-ups, prior contextual community engagement, and streamlining of patient-transactions through an electronic health record (EHR).

Health benefit utilization and out-of-pocket expenses in outpatient care and hospitalizations: Baseline surveys of three primary care sites in the Philippines

Background@#The Philippine Primary Care Studies (PPCS) is a network of pilot studies that developed, implemented, and tested strategies to strengthen primary care in the country. These pilot studies were implemented in an urban, rural, and remote setting. The aim is to use the findings to guide the policies of the national health insurance program (PhilHealth), the main payor for individualized healthcare services in the country.@*Objective@#The objective of this report is to compare baseline outpatient benefit utilization, hospitalization, and health spending, including out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses, in three health settings (urban, rural, and remote). These findings were used to contextualize strategies to strengthen primary care in these three settings.@*Methods@#Cross-sectional surveys were carried out using an interviewer-assisted questionnaire on a random sample of families in the urban site, and a stratified random sample of households in the rural and remote sites. The questionnaire asked for out-patient and hospitalization utilization and spending, including the OOP expenses. @*Results@#A total of 787 families/households were sampled across the three sites. For outpatient benefits, utilization was low in all sites. The remote site had the lowest utilization at only 15%. Unexpectedly, the average annual OOP expenses for outpatient consults in the remote site was PhP 571.92/per capita. This is 40% higher than expenses shouldered by families in the rural area, but similar with the urban site. For hospital benefits, utilization was lowest in the remote site (55.7%) compared to 75.0% and 78.1% for the urban and rural sites, respectively. OOP expenses per year were highest in the remote site at PhP 2204.44 per capita, probably because of delay in access to healthcare and consequently more severe conditions. Surprisingly, annual expenses per year for families in the rural sites (PhP 672.03 per capita) were less than half of what families in the urban sites spent (PhP 1783.38 per capita). @*Conclusions@#Compared to families in the urban site and households in the rural sites, households in remote areas have higher disease rates and consequently, increased need for outpatient and inpatient health services. When they do get sick, access to care is more difficult. This leads to lower rates of benefit utilization and higher out-of-pocket expenses. Thus, provision of “equal” benefits can inadvertently lead to “inequitable” healthcare, pushing disadvantaged populations into a greater disadvantage. These results imply that health benefits need to be allocated according to need. Families in poorer and more remote areas may require greater subsidies.

Philippine pediatric COVID-19 living clinical practice guidelines as of March 2022

Executive Summary@#The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered a global crisis and has affected millions of people worldwide. With the evolution of the different variants of concern, the incidence of COVID- 19 in the pediatric population has risen. The Surveillance and Analysis of COVID-19 in Children Nationwide (SALVACION) Registry, developed by the Pediatric Infectious Disease Society of the Philippines (PIDSP) and the Philippine Pediatric Society (PPS), has reported 3,221 cases as of March 31, 2022, with 90.4% requiring hospitalization and 36.2% with moderate to critical disease severity. Given the magnitude of the impact of COVID-19, with most of the clinical recommendations available designed towards adult patients, there was an urgent need for clinicians, public health officials and the government to also prioritize evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the pediatric population. Hence, the development of the Philippine Pediatric COVID-19 Living Clinical Practice Guidelines was conceptualized. This independent project, funded and supported by the PPS and PIDSP, aimed to formulate up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations on the treatment, diagnosis, infection prevention and control of COVID-19 in children. Following the standard CPG development process outlined in the DOH Manual for CPG Development and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, 15 evidence summaries and 24 recommendations were generated by 12 consensus panelists representing their specific health organizations and institutions.

Governance in primary care systems: Experiences and lessons from urban, rural, and remote settings in the Philippines

Methods@#Data on governance issues were obtained from participant observation and regular meetings facilitated over one year. Conducted across urban, rural, and remote settings, the present study outlines experience-near insights throughout a hierarchy of system implementers—from those in positions of authority to frontline workers. These insights were thematically analyzed and organized following the Health System Dynamics Framework.@*Results@#This study identified six governance challenges: 1) establishing a health information system; 2) engaging leaders, healthcare staff, and communities; 3) assuring efficient financing; 4) assuring health workforce sufficiency; 5) addressing legal challenges; and 6) planning evaluation and monitoring. To address these challenges, this study forwards systemic solutions to advance effective governance and improve healthcare performance.@*Conclusion@#A renewed approach to strengthening primary care systems is fundamental to achieving universal healthcare. This entails good governance that develops strategies, equips people with tools for proper implementation, and provides data for evidence-based policies. The experiences outlined in the present study envisions guiding policymakers toward improving health outcomes in a devolved setting.

Adherence of physicians to local guideline recommendations among patients with COVID-19 in two Tertiary Public Hospitals in Metro Manila, Philippines: A rapid assessment study

Objectives@#Adherence to clinical practice guidelines (CPG) has been shown to reduce inter-physician practice variation and improve quality of care. This study evaluated guideline adherence of physicians in two tertiary public hospitals to local CPG on COVID-19. @*Methods@#This was a multicenter, retrospective chart review, rapid assessment method study. Guideline adherence and non-adherence (overuse and underuse) to 15 strong recommendations in the prevailing Philippine COVID-19 Living Recommendations were assessed among a sample of patients admitted in two centers from July to October 2021. Differences in adherence across COVID-19 disease severities and managing hospital units were analyzed. @*Results@#A total of 723 patient charts from two centers were reviewed. Guideline adherence to dexamethasone use among patients with hypoxemia is 91.4% (95% CI 88.6 to 93.6) with 9.2% overuse. Tocilizumab was underused in 52.2% of patients with indications to receive the drug. There was overuse of empiric antibiotics in 43.6% of patients without suspicion of bacterial coinfection. Lowest adherence to antibiotic use was seen among patients with critical disease severity and those managed in the intensive care unit. None of the other non-recommended treatment modalities were given. @*Conclusion@#Management of COVID-19 in both centers was generally adherent to guideline recommendations. We detected high underuse of tocilizumab probably related to the global supply shortage during the study period and high overuse of antibiotics in patients without suspicion of bacterial coinfection. While the results of this study cannot be generalized in other healthcare settings, we recommend the application of similar rapid assessment studies in guideline adherence evaluation as a quality improvement tool and to identify issues with resource utilization especially during public health emergencies.

An outcomes-based evaluation of the mindfulness for safe schools program

Objectives@#The objective of this evaluation was to assess the effectiveness of Mindfulness for Safe Schools, a mindfulness-based intervention adapted for sexual abuse prevention during peer-to-peer dating among Filipino public school children in Grades 7 and 8. It was hoped that through the intervention, children would be able to regulate their emotions so that they do not react impulsively to emotionally stimulating events, especially during peer dating. The study consists of four levels of evaluation: reaction, learnings, and behaviors of teachers toward the program, as well as effect of the intervention on emotion regulation and peer conformity among students. @*Methods@#This study utilized a mixed methods design using a concurrent embedded method. For teachers, quantitative surveys and focused group discussions were conducted to determine their reactions to the training, their learnings, and behaviors after the program, as well as their observations of students’ responses to the intervention. Focused group discussions were analyzed through thematic analysis. Effect of the program on emotion regulation and peer conformity among students were determined mainly through a pre and post-test survey and analyzed through paired samples t-test. Video content analysis of the classroom delivery was also conducted to determine student engagement during the program. @*Results@#Teachers reacted favorably to the training workshops and were able to use what they learned from the workshops to increase their patience and understanding towards themselves, their job, and their students. Students also reacted favorably to the Mindfulness for Safe Schools modules and were observed to use the skills taught in the modules to regulate their emotions. Emotion regulation improved (t=3.47, significant with p=0.00) and susceptibility to peer pressure decreased (t=8.94, significant with p=0.00) for Grade 8 students (n=950) after the modules were delivered. However, teachers reported implementation issues, such as conflicting requirements of the program with their official workload, which may have affected program effects. @*Conclusion@#Our findings indicate that Mindfulness for Safe Schools was associated with improvements in emotional awareness, management of negative emotions, and showing care and respect for student peers. It also suggests that integrating mindfulness interventions in schools requires close coordination with all stakeholders: teachers, schools, and appropriate government divisions to ensure fidelity and reaching desired effects.

Technical capacity mapping for clinical practice guideline development in the Philippines

@#<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Background.</strong> A 2017 situational analysis assessing Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) development in the Philippines revealed CPGs of inconsistent quality. In response, the Department of Health (DOH)-Philippine Health Insurance Corporation Manual for CPG Development was developed to outline the standardized steps of the CPG development process. To implement this, technically qualified institutions and individuals should be commissioned.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Objective.</strong> To identify qualified institutions and individuals and map out their technical skills and potential for capacit building in CPG development</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Methods.</strong> Mixed methods were used in this cross-sectional study. A snowballing method identified specific institutions and individuals. Self-administered surveys and key informant interviews were conducted to determine competence, strengths, and gaps in the development of CPGs.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Results.</strong> A total of 74 individuals from 45 institutions with competencies in CPG development were identified. Of the 45 institutions, 72% were non-clinical, with roughly half working on formal research. Of the 74 individuals, 96% possessed relevant knowledge and skills and 85% already provided training on CPG development topics. Around half of the respondents have been part of a CPG development task force. Only about half were able to incorporate social concepts of equity, and only one-third had experience in managing conflicts of interest.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Conclusion.</strong> Qualified institutions and individuals identified in this capacity mapping can be tapped in future CPG development in the country. Incorporation of social concepts and management of conflicts of interest still need to be ensured.</p>

Systemic lupus erythematosus in Filipino children: A 10-year retrospective analysis of mortality, morbidity and survival

Background. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) in children has been estimated to account for 15 to 20% of all SLE cases worldwide. It was described to have more severe disease at presentation including renal, neuropsychiatric, and hematologic involvements; more disease activity over time, and a significantly higher risk of organ damage. Thus, considered a significant risk factor for mortality among adult SLE patients.Objective. This is a retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the clinical profile, outcome, and survival of SLE among Filipino children.Methods. All SLE patients, less than 19 years old, diagnosed in the pediatric department of a tertiary hospital from January 2008 to December 2017 were included in the study. Their medical charts were retrieved for data gathering. Demographics, and clinical disease characteristics were collected from admission and on subsequent follow ups. Lost to follow up patients were contacted for updates of their current clinical status.Results. A total of 261 pediatric SLE patients were gathered. Average age at diagnosis is 14.5 years old (±2.7), with female to male ratio of 16:1. Symptoms starts at 3 months prior to consult (±2.1). Upon diagnosis, most of the patients have fever, malar rash, alopecia, oral ulcers, and proteinuria. Most common systemic organ involvement through time were mucocutaneous, hematologic, and renal. Steroids were the mainstay management for all patients, in which 95% started on oral Prednisone, while 71% needed IV Methylprednisolone in at least once during the disease course. Two patients received biologic treatment. Overall mortality rate was 14.9%, identified to be secondary to sepsis and/or SLE activity. Myocarditis, pleural effusion, and seizures were identified as significant risk factors for mortality. Survival rate at 1 year and 10 years were 92% and 79%, respectively.Conclusion. SLE in Filipino children mostly presents with mucocutaneous symptoms. Presence of seizures, myocarditis, and pleural effusion at any time of the disease entails risk for mortality. SLE nephritis is a substantial cause of morbidity due to its chronicity. The survival rate of Filipino children with SLE is comparable with the data from other developing countries.

Is face mask with face shield more effective than face mask alone in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission? A systematic review

@#<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Background.</strong> The use of face shield in addition to face mask is thought to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by blocking respiratory droplets and by preventing one from touching facial orifices.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Objective.</strong> To determine the effectiveness of face mask with face shield, compared to face mask alone, in reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Methods.</strong> We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, as well as trial registers, preprint sites and COVID-19 living evidence sites as of 30 September 2021. We included studies that used face shield with face mask versus face mask alone to prevent COVID-19. We screened studies, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Review Manager 5.4 was used to estimate pooled effects.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Results.</strong> There is no available direct evidence for face shield plus face mask versus face mask alone in the general public. Five (5) observational studies with very low certainty of evidence due to serious risk of bias and indirectness were included. Participants in all the studies were health care workers (HCWs) who used the face shield with their standard personal protective equipment (PPE). Four (4) of the studies were in the hospital setting (three case control studies, one pre- and post-surveillance study); one was done in the community (one pre- and post-surveillance study) in which HCWs visited the residence of the contacts of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients. The case control studies done in the hospital setting showed a trend toward benefit with the use of face shield or goggle but this was inconclusive (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) while the pre- and post-surveillance study showed significant benefit when face shield (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.22-0.37) use became a requirement for HCWs upon hospital entry. In the study done in the community setting, significant protection for HCWs was noted with the use of face shield (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00-0.69) but the results were limited by serious risk of bias and imprecision.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Conclusion.</strong> In the hospital setting, there was a lower likelihood of COVID-19 infection in HCWs who used a face shield or goggles on top of their PPE. For the general public in the community, there is presently no study on the use of face shield in addition to the face mask to prevent COVID-19 infection.</p>

Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Filipino children: A 10-year retrospective analysis of mortality, morbidity and survival

@#Background. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) in children has been estimated to account for 15 to 20% of all SLE cases worldwide. It was described to have more severe disease at presentation including renal, neuropsychiatric, and hematologic involvements; more disease activity over time, and a significantly higher risk of organ damage. Thus, considered a significant risk factor for mortality among adult SLE patients. Objective. This is a retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the clinical profile, outcome, and survival of SLE among Filipino children. Methods. All SLE patients, less than 19 years old, diagnosed in the pediatric department of a tertiary hospital from January 2008 to December 2017 were included in the study. Their medical charts were retrieved for data gathering. Demographics, and clinical disease characteristics were collected from admission and on subsequent follow ups. Lost to follow up patients were contacted for updates of their current clinical status. Results. A total of 261 pediatric SLE patients were gathered. Average age at diagnosis is 14.5 years old (±2.7), with female to male ratio of 16:1. Symptoms starts at 3 months prior to consult (±2.1). Upon diagnosis, most of the patients have fever, malar rash, alopecia, oral ulcers, and proteinuria. Most common systemic organ involvement through time were mucocutaneous, hematologic, and renal. Steroids were the mainstay management for all patients, in which 95% started on oral Prednisone, while 71% needed IV Methylprednisolone in at least once during the disease course. Two patients received biologic treatment. Overall mortality rate was 14.9%, identified to be secondary to sepsis and/or SLE activity. Myocarditis, pleural effusion, and seizures were identified as significant risk factors for mortality. Survival rate at 1 year and 10 years were 92% and 79%, respectively. Conclusion. SLE in Filipino children mostly presents with mucocutaneous symptoms. Presence of seizures, myocarditis, and pleural effusion at any time of the disease entails risk for mortality. SLE nephritis is a substantial cause of morbidity due to its chronicity. The survival rate of Filipino children with SLE is comparable with the data from other developing countries.

Are vaccines effective and safe for the prevention of COVID-19 infections? A living systematic review

@#Introduction. In the attempt to control the spread of the disease and the pandemic, numerous COVID-19 vaccines are in development. A review of the evidence on their efficacy and safety are critical. Methods. A search for trials was done using the COVID-19 Living OVerview of Evidence (L·OVE) platform. We also searched for relevant authorization documents and trial reports for COVID-19 vaccines of the US-Food and Drug Authority (US-FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the United Kingdom Medicines and Health Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and the WHO website. We included studies that fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: population – humans; intervention – COVID-19 vaccines; comparison – control or placebo; outcomes – efficacy and adverse events; methods – phase 3 randomized trials. Two reviewers independently screened the reports, assessed the methodological quality, and extracted the data on the trial characteristics and results on vaccine efficacy and safety. The date of last search was March 11, 2021. Results. Interim results of trials investigating five vaccines were identified and included in the review. All five vaccines demonstrated satisfactory vaccine efficacy (VE) against symptomatic COVID-19 infection among adults in the short term with moderate certainty of evidence: BNT162b2, VE 95% (95% CI 90.3, 97.6); mRNA-1273, VE 93.6% (95% CI 88.6, 96.5); ChAdOx1, VE 66.7% (95% CI 57.4, 74.0), Gam-COVID-Vac, VE 91.1% (95% CI 83.6, 95.1); and Ad26.CoV2.S, VE 67.2% (95% CI 59.3, 73.7). Data on the efficacy against severe COVID-19 infection and asymptomatic COVID-19 infection are still inconclusive, except for Ad26.CoV2.S, which demonstrated good efficacy in preventing moderate and/or severe COVID-19 infection and acceptable protection against asymptomatic COVID-19 infection 28 days after vaccination (moderate certainty of evidence). Efficacy data on preventing death from COVID-19 infection are still inconclusive. Very limited phase 3 trial data is available to inform vaccine efficacy against the different variants of SARS-CoV-2. Vaccination with these five vaccines was associated with higher adverse reactions compared to control. These adverse events, due to reactions to the vaccines, were mild to moderate and of short duration. Available evidence on vaccine efficacy and safety is limited, mainly due to the short follow up and the small sample size of specific populations. Conclusion. BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1, Gam-COVID-Vac and Ad26.CoV.S vaccines demonstrated satisfactory vaccine efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 infection among adults in the short term with moderate certainty of evidence. Data on the efficacy against severe COVID-19 infection, asymptomatic COVID-19 infection, and death from COVID-19 infection are still inconclusive. Long-term efficacy and safety data, and data on the efficacy against variant strains of SARS-CoV-2 are still lacking.

Clinical characteristics and patient symptoms associated with poor outcomes among children with COVID-19: A rapid review

Objective@#To identify specific clinical characteristics and patient signs and symptoms that increase the risk of developing severe/critical COVID-19 disease or death in the pediatric population, and identify strength of these associations @*Methodology@#A systematic search was done in PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane Library and grey literature databases focusing on severe and critical COVID-19 disease in the zero to eighteen year old age group until August 26, 2020. Data regarding patient characteristics, signs and symptoms on admission and disease severity were extracted. Outcomes measured were severe or critical COVID-19, Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) or death. Results were pooled and meta-analyzed. @*Results@#Four eligible studies with a total of 292 pediatric patients with COVID-19 were examined. Older children (MD=6.62, 95%CI=4.23 to 9.00, p-value<0.00001, I2=33%) significantly present with a higher percentage of severe disease. Shortness of breath (OR=8.14, 95%CI=2.33 to 28.47, p-value=0.001, I2=42%) was also found to be associated with severe COVID-19 disease. The presence of a pre-existing medical condition (OR=4.02, 95%CI=1.55 to 10.43, p-value=0.004, I2=0%), especially cardiac disease (OR=6.40, 95%CI=1.45 to 28.38, p-value=0.01, I 2=13%) and diabetes (OR=7.01, 95%CI=1.54 to 31.95, p-value=0.01, I2=0%) was noted to be a risk factor for severe disease. @*Conclusion@#Based on poor quality observational studies, older age group, shortness of breath, and a pre-existing medical condition, especially cardiac disease or diabetes were found to be associated with poor outcomes in children with COVID-19.

A rapid review on the sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR done on different clinical specimens

Background@#RT-PCR using respiratory tract specimens, most commonly nasopharyngeal swab (NPS), has been used to confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19. NPS is a relatively invasive procedure that causes patient discomfort and risks viral transmission. Other specimens are therefore being investigated for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. @*Objective@#To determine the sensitivity of non-respiratory tract specimens in detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in patients with COVID-19. @*Methodology@#This review summarized the results of eight studies obtained from a literature search done in May 2020 in PubMed MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and MedRxiv. Two independent investigators reviewed and appraised the studies that were included, and pooled estimates of sensitivity for each specimen were determined using Stata’s Metaprop function@*Results@#The sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in non-respiratory tract specimens of diagnosed COVID-19 patients are as follows: Saliva 77% (95% CI 71-83%), stool/rectal swab/anal swab 22% (95% CI 22-37%), blood/serum/plasma 2% (95% CI 1-3%), and urine 22% (95% CI 18-25%). @*Conclusion@#SARS-CoV-2 RNA is detected in saliva, stool/rectal swab/anal swab, blood/serum/plasma and urine. Among these, saliva has the highest estimated sensitivity. However, more studies are needed to correct the heterogeneity brought about by factors such as timing of specimen collection, disease severity and treatment.

The use of preoperative clinical risk assessment in COVID-19 screening among asymptomatic individuals, its cost-effectiveness and impact on surgical outcomes and management decisions: A rapid review

Objective@#This rapid review aimed to summarize data on the accuracy, benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of preoperative COVID-19 clinical risk assessment for asymptomatic individuals. @*Methods@#A comprehensive search in MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, ChinaXiv, medRxiv, and bioRxiv was done until March 10, 2021, using the keywords “COVID-19”, “surgery”, “RT-PCR”, “clinical risk assessment” and “cost-effectiveness”. We searched for studies that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative clinical risk assessment in COVID-19 screening among asymptomatic individuals, its cost-effectiveness, and its impact on surgical outcomes and management decisions. Risk of bias was assessed using Evaluation of Articles on Diagnosis (Painless Evidence Based Medicine)10 for accuracy studies, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale11 for cohort studies, and Drummond’s checklist12 for economic evaluations. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the overall evidence. Data from included studies were collated qualitatively using summary tables and analyzed in Review Manager 5.4. Pooling of sensitivity and specificity, odds ratio or adjusted odds ratio, and cost-effectiveness measures using a random-effects model was planned. Heterogeneity was determined using I2. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were preplanned in case significant heterogeneity was found. @*Results@#Three observational studies were included. Preoperative clinical risk assessment for COVID-19 demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.42 (95% CI 0.15-0.72) and a specificity of 0.85 (95% CI 0.76-0.92), using RT-PCR as a reference standard. Indirect evidence showed that any positive clinical risk assessment, COVID-19 antigen or RT-PCR test is done within 0–7 weeks from surgery was associated with a higher 30-day postoperative mortality (RR 3.96, 95% CI 3.41, 4.59) and pulmonary complications (RR 3.41, 95% CI 3.04, 3.83). Delaying surgery at least seven weeks from COVID-19 diagnosis was associated with lower post-surgical complications. Universal pre-endoscopy virus testing using the antigen rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) (ICER = -26,286 €), standard RT-PCR (ICER = -11,128€), or rapid PCR (ICER = -13,703 €) combined with high-risk personal protective equipment (PPE) use in all patients irrespective of test results were found to be more cost-effective compared to no pre-endoscopy testing and no high-risk PPE use, at an, assumed COVID-19 prevalence of 1% or higher among asymptomatic individuals. Overall certainty of evidence was very low. @*Conclusion@#Preoperative clinical risk assessment has poor sensitivity but high specificity for detecting COVID-19 among asymptomatic individuals undergoing elective surgery. Objective diagnostic tests such as RT-PCR or Ag-RDT may still be needed to inform surgery schedules. @*@#

The diagnostic accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 rapid antibody tests among asymptomatic employees returning to work during General Community Quarantine Period (June 1 to July 31, 2020)

Objectives@#The study was done to determine the diagnostic accuracy of rapid antibody tests (RATs) in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection among asymptomatic employees returning to work. The study also aimed to determine the prevalence of asymptomatic RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection among these workers. @*Methods@#The study was a retrospective cohort of asymptomatic employees involved in the manufacturing, marketing, and sales of pharmaceutical, consumer, and animal products in the Philippines. They underwent screening for COVID-19 using both rapid antibody and RT-PCR tests as part of the return-to-work company policy from June 1 to July 31, 2020. The sensitivity and specificity of the RATs were computed using RT-PCR as the reference standard. The prevalence of RT-PCR positive COVID-19 infections among asymptomatic returning workers was also determined. @*Results@#Asymptomatic workers (n=5,585) were simultaneously tested for COVID-19 using RAT and RT-PCR. The sensitivity of a positive IgG and IgM was 23.9 (95% CI: 22.8 – 25.0), while the specificity was 93.3 (95% CI: 92.6 - 93.9). The prevalence of RT-PCR identified COVID-19 infection among asymptomatic workers was 4.9% (95% CI: 4.4 – 5.5). @*Conclusion@#The utility of RATs as a screening tool to detect asymptomatic COVID-19 individuals is limited due to its low sensitivity compared to RT-PCR.

Should vitamin D supplements be used as adjunct treatment for COVID-19: A rapid review

Background@#Pooled data from observational studies suggest that patients with serum vitamin D levels below 30 ng/mL had an increased risk of infection and mortality from COVID-19. This rapid review aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of vitamin D as an adjunct treatment for COVID-19. @*Methods@#We searched MEDLINE (PubMed) and CENTRAL up to July 18, 2021. We also searched trial registries, gray literature, and reference lists of included and excluded studies in the search as well as COVID-19 guidelines. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, collected data, and assessed for risk of bias. Meta-analysis was conducted, and an evidence profile table using GRADEpro was generated. Outcomes included were mortality, need for mechanical ventilator or progression of oxygen support, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, hospital length of stay, SARS-CoV-2 positivity at day 21, and adverse events.@*Results@#We found four RCTs (3 low risk of bias and 1 high risk of bias). The sources of bias among the RCTs were unclear allocation, lack of blinding of patients, caregivers, and outcome assessors, and high drop-out rate. This rapid review found that the effects of vitamin D are inconclusive for the following outcomes: mortality (pooled RR 0.62, 95% CI [0.16 to 2.41], I2=49%; n=443, 3 RCTs, very low certainty of evidence), need for mechanical ventilator or progression of oxygen support (RR 0.52, 95% CI [0.24 to 1.13], n=237, 1 RCT, low certainty of evidence), and ICU admission (pooled RR 0.37, 95% CI [0.09 to 1.61], I2=78%; n=443, 3 RCTs, very low certainty of evidence. No significant reduction in hospital length of stay was found among those treated with vitamin D (MD 0 days, 95% CI [-1.19 to 1.09], low certainty of evidence). The duration of mechanical ventilation was also was also not significantly shortened in the treatment group (15 days) compared with placebo (12.8 days), MD 2.2 days, 95% CI [-8.4 to 12.8], low certainty of evidence. Interestingly, a higher proportion of those supplemented with vitamin D showed virologic clearance for COVID-19 on day 21 (RR 3.0, 95% CI [1.26 to 7.14], n=40, 1 RCT). At dosages between 60,000 to 200,000 IU of cholecalciferol, only one episode of vomiting (0.8%) was reported. @*Conclusion@#Based on the evidence found, we are uncertain whether vitamin D is beneficial or harmful for patients with COVID-19. There is very low certainty of evidence to recommend the use of vitamin D supplements as an adjunct treatment for patients with COVID-19. Vitamin D supplementation for patients with COVID-19 should be limited to clinical trials or among those with proven vitamin D deficiency. More published studies are awaited to explore the benefit or harm of vitamin D for COVID-19.

Is SARS-CoV-2 transmitted by asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infected individuals?

Key Findings@#Asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 may occur. • Manifestations of COVID-19 are highly varied and may include asymptomatic cases, who do not manifest with any signs and symptoms despite testing positive for COVID-19 by viral nucleic acid tests. Pre-symptomatic cases are infected individuals who are still in their incubation period, hence do not exhibit any symptoms yet but eventually develop symptoms. • As of June 2020, only 586 (2.8%) of the 20,990 active cases in the Philippines were classified as asymptomatic, but it is unclear whether cases are pre-symptomatic or carriers (true asymptomatic). • Based on 36 observational studies (case reports, case series, cross-sectional and cohort studies) and 9 statistical modeling analysis, asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 may occur. However, 3 studies reported no transmission from pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic cases. • Studies on viral load comparing symptomatic cases with pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic cases reported contradicting results. The duration of viral shedding was significantly longer for symptomatic patients compared to asymptomatic patients but similar for asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic patients. • Therewas no difference in the transmission rates of symptomatic and asymptomatic cases. However,the estimated infectivity and probability of transmission was higherfor symptomatic cases compared to asymptomatic cases, but results were imprecise due to a wide confidence interval. • The World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recognize the possibility of pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic transmission. According to WHO, current evidence suggests asymptomatic cases are less likely to transmit the virus than symptomatic cases.

Should Intravenous Immunoglobulin G (IVIg) be used in the treatment of COVID-19?

@#There is conflicting evidence on the efficacy of intravenous immunoglobin G in the treatment of COVID-19 patients with severe disease. Intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIg) is a mixture of polyclonal immunoglobulin G (IgG3, IgG4) antibodies as well as variable amounts of proteins; IgA, IgE and IgM antibodies isolated and pooled from healthy donors. IgG is involved in viral neutralization, modulates anti-inflammatory cytokines and cytokine antagonists. Immediate adverse effects of IVIg include flu-like syndrome, dermatologic side effects, arrhythmia, hypotension, and transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI). Delayed adverse effects can involve any organ which could be severe or even lethal There was a retrospective study (Yun Xie 2020) and several case reports that described recovery of COVID positive patients with severe disease. However, a retrospective study showed that immunoglobulin G with steroids and antivirals did not improve COVID patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (Liu Y 2020). Similarly, another study showed no significant difference in the 28- and 60-day mortality between the IVIg and non-IVIg groups but subgroup analyses reported that in those with critical COVID illness, 28 day mortality is decreased with IVIg (Shao Z). There are eight registered clinical trials on the use of intravenous immunoglobulin G in COVID-19 patients.

Setting core competencies of health workers towards quality primary care: Proceedings of a National Consultative Workshop

@#The National Academy of Science and Technology (NAST), in cooperation with the Philippine Primary Care Studies (PPCS), organized the Stakeholders’ Meeting on Training Objectives for Primary Care in the Philippines on February 1, 2018, at Hotel Jen, Pasay City. The stakeholder’s meeting arrived at a consensus on the objectives of primary care workshops, training the existing cadre of doctors, nurses, midwives, and BHWs in the country. Competencies built upon these training objectives will strengthen the capacity of health care workers to render patient-centered primary care services. The expected output was not intended to replace the objectives of existing professional training curricula. Instead, the consensus obtained through this meeting works to establish the framework from which future primary care training workshops can be built upon.

Should IgM/IgG rapid test kit be used in the diagnosis of COVID-19?

Key Findings@# Current evidence does NOT support use of IgM/IgG rapid test kits for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 in currently symptomatic patients. • The present standard for diagnosis of COVID-19 is through qualitative detection of COVID-19 virus nucleic acid via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). • Due to long turnaround times and complicated logistical operations, a rapid and simple field test alternative is needed to diagnose and screen patients. • An alternative to the direct detection and measurement of viral load (RT-PCR) is the qualitative detection of specific antibodies to COVID-19. ELISA (discussed in a separate rapid review) and lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA) IgM/IgG rapid test kits are two currently available, qualitative, antibody tests for COVID-19. • Two low quality clinical trials showed that there is insufficient evidence to support the use of IgM/IgG rapid test kits for the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19. Diagnostic accuracy varies greatly depending on the timing of the test. The test performed very poorly during the early phase of the disease (i.e., less than eight days from onset of symptoms). • Existing guidelines do not recommend serologic antibody tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19 in currently symptomatic patients.