ABSTRACT
Global environmental change is mainly due to human behaviours and is a major threat to sustainability. Despite all the health and economic consequences, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on environmental health warrants the scientific community's attention. Thus, this article examined and narratively reviewed the impact of several drastic measures taken on the macro environment and holistic planetary health. We note that the amount of pollution in the air, water, soil, and noise showed a significant decline during the pandemic. Global air quality improved due to lower anthropogenic emissions of air pollutants and atmospheric particles. Water ecosystems also demonstrated signs of recuperation in many countries. Less commercial fishing internationally resulted in the restoration of some aquatic life. Additionally, significant reduction of solid and water waste led to less soil pollution. Some places experienced cleaner beaches and ocean water while wildlife sightings in urban areas across the world occurred more often. Lastly, the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown also led to a worldwide decline in noise pollution. However, the beneficial environmental effects will not be permanent as the world gradually returns to its pre-pandemic status quo. Therefore, behavioural changes such as adopting a lifestyle that reduces carbon footprint are needed to make a positive impact on the environment. In addition, world leaders should consider the national policy changes necessary to ensure continuity of as many of the positive environmental impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown as possible. Those changes would also serve to lessen the likelihood of another zoonotic calamity.
ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused significant disruption to established medical care systems globally. Thus, this study was aimed to compare the admission and outcome variables such as number of patient and its severity, acute recanalisation therapy given pre-post COVID-19 at a primary stroke centre located in Malaysia. Methods: This cross-sectional hospital-based study included adult ischaemic stroke patients. Variables of the study included the number of ischaemic stroke patients, the proportions of recanalisation therapies, stroke severity during admission based on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, functional outcome at discharge based on the modified Rankin Scale, and relevant workflow metrics. We compared the outcome between two six-month periods, namely the pre-COVID-19 period (March 2019 to September 2019) and the COVID-19 period (March 2020 to September 2020). Results: There were 131 and 156 patients, respectively, from the pre-COVID-19 period and the COVID-19 period. The median door-to-scan time and the median door-to-reperfusion time were both significantly shorter in the COVID-19 period (24.5 min versus 12.0 min, p = 0.047) and (93.5 min versus 60.0 min, p = 0.015), respectively. There were also significantly more patients who received intravenous thrombolysis (7.6% versus 17.3%, p = 0.015) and mechanical thrombectomy (0.8% versus 6.4%, p = 0.013) in the COVID-19 period, respectively. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic may not have caused disruptions of acute stroke care in our primary stroke centre. Our data indicated that the number of ischaemic stroke events remained stable, with a significant increase of recanalisation therapies and better in-hospital workflow metrics during the COVID-19 pandemic period. However, we would like to highlight that the burden of COVID-19 cases in the study area was very low. Therefore, the study may not have captured the true burden (and relevant delays in stroke patient management) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The effect of the pandemic crisis is ongoing and both pre-hospital and in-hospital care systems must continue to provide optimal, highly time-dependent stroke care services.