Rationale. COVID-19 pandemic disease, can be transmitted during gastrointestinal procedures, via aerosolized droplets, and via fecal shedding. Both international and local endoscopy societies have issued strategies to alleviate the risk to endoscopy personnel. However, several barriers against the implementation of these recommendations exist thus individual center’s policies are employed whenever applicable. Objectives. This narrative study aims to describe the current experience and set-up in the endoscopy unit of a COVID referral center, discuss the stratification of patients for endoscopy, the operational management of the personnel and endoscopy unit in line with the adapted local and international guidelines and offer endoscopists a quick reference guide to adapt endoscopy practice during the pandemic in a resource-limited setting. Methodology. This paper reviews and consolidates current endoscopy guidelines and describes the single-center experience of Philippine General Hospital. Results. In resource-limited settings, with uncertainties of prolonged COVID-19 impact to healthcare, modification of practice, adherence to strategies and recommendations, empowerment of workforce, establishing the sustainability of resources, training, and service to patients, are essential components to combat current dilemma brought about by this pandemic. Conclusion. Integration of current local and international guidelines encompass all aspects of endoscopy practice during the pandemic. The recommendations cited are aimed to guide other resource-limited endoscopy units for potential changes and guidance in the overall practice.
COVID-19

Objective: This paper aims to determine the respiratory manifestations, radiologic findings, and management of coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) among the hospitalized children of different age groups based on a systematic review of literature.

Methodology: We searched the MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and MedRvrix databases for relevant studies on pediatric COVID-19 done between January 1 to May 25, 2020. Data on demographic features, pulmonary symptoms, chest imaging findings, and oxygen support were extracted in a data abstraction form and analyzed among the different pediatric age groups.

Results:?Sixteen studies were included in this systematic review, with a total of 61 patients. Thirty-nine patients (64%) belong to the 2 to 12 year age group. Cough was the most commonly reported respiratory symptoms among children older than one month. Most of the patients, particularly adolescents, had asymptomatic or mild infection. On chest imaging, infiltrates and ground-glass opacities were the most common abnormalities. Oxygen supplementation via nasal cannula, non-invasive ventilation, and mechanical ventilation was noted in three cases.

Conclusion: Our systematic review shows that COVID-19 can present with a spectrum of respiratory manifestations and disease severity as well as a variety of radiologic abnormalities across different pediatric age groups. Whilemost children do not develop hypoxemia warranting oxygen supplementation, a severe respiratory infection can still manifest in children. Asymptomatic and milder infections are common and highlight the need for appropriate respiratory precautions. More pediatric studies on the pulmonary manifestations and management of children with COVID-19 can aid in a better understanding of this novel disease.

This paper shall present a case of a 42-year-old nulligravid who complained of chronic pelvic pain, vaginal bleeding and palpable abdominal mass secondary to multiple large myomas. Due to the logistical and health restrictions in most hospitals during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, elective surgery was postponed and a temporizing medical management was instituted in the form of GnRH agonist, which afforded relief. This paper shall also discuss the mechanism of action of GnRH agonist, and its crucial role as an essential medical treatment option for patients with debilitating conditions such as myoma uteri.

Reintegration is an integral part of nursing care. Nurses play a critical role in contributing support, dependence, and continuity of care from rehabilitation to reintegration. While the reintegration of patients is a concept often used in nursing, its theoretical origin has remained unclear. This article aimed to conduct a concept analysis of reintegration for the development of nursing as a discipline and improve nursing care and health outcomes. The evolutionary strategy to concept analysis of Roger was utilized, which resulted in the characteristics of reintegration as to its attributes, antecedents, consequences, and exemplar in nursing practice in the context of COVID-19. The capacity to adapt, reorganize, offer support, and build a network of resources are attributed to the concept of reintegration. Antecedents include rehabilitation, survivorship from illnesses, trauma, and injuries, and disruption of social and physical functional performances and activities. The identified consequences include transition to recovery, quality of life, independence, successful adaptation, job satisfaction, holistic care, and continuity of care. The new conceptual definition of reintegration emerged. Reintegration is a process of nursing care among patients who demand assistance and support before transitioning to regain normality or on their way to being restored to the community in the presence of adaptation from health adversities. The patient in all areas is cared for holistically, offering support to meet his needs and overcome challenges in terms of physical, mental, social, and emotional aspects. Concept analysis is as essential as operationalizing a concept in the nursing discipline.
COVID-19

Background: The search for simple clinical and laboratory markers to help predict the clinical severity of patients presenting with COVID-19 has prompted this study to look at the predictive value of urine L-FABP (Liver Type-Fatty Acid Binding Protein) point-of-care test kit at the initial presentation of COVID-19 patients to the hospital. Methods: The validation study prospectively included 109 consecutive patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, mean age of 52.2 years (range 19-84) presenting at the Emergency Rooms of 4 participating Metro-Manila hospitals from February to April 2021, with available data for analysis for 103 patients. Urine L-FABP POC (Point-of-Care) test and other clinical parameters and the level of severity of COVID-19 were determined at Day 0, Day 4 and Day 7. Computations for Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive and Negative Predictive values and Likelihood ratios were performed. Results: Twenty-three patients tested positive for urine L-FABP, out of the 103 patients analyzed, while 80 tested negative. Of the 23 patients who tested positive for urine L-FABP, 6 has progressed in severity, while 17 did not progressed. Of the 80 patients who tested negative for urine L-FABP, 13 progressed, while 67 did not progressed in severity. Giving a Sensitivity of 31.58%, Specificity of 79.76%, Positive predictive value of 26.09%, Negative predictive value of 83.75%. Combining urine L-FABP and initial clinical parameters like SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome) criteria to predict progression of severity yielded a higher Specificity of 91.67 % and Negative Predictive value of 84.62%. Conclusions The study shows the utility of initial urine L-FABP POC test as a negative screening test in triaging adult patients presenting to the ER with mild to moderate COVID-19. Patients at the ER with a negative urine L-FABP test, will most likely not progressed to severe COVID-19. Combining clinical parameters like SIRS Criteria with the urine L-FABP result can increase the negative predictive value.
COVID-19

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.
COVID-19

Background: COVID-19 is an ongoing health concern that hospitals have struggled to keep up with, given its increasing burden with the passage of time. Considerations for the management of COVID-19 should be made especially for pregnant patients and their neonates. Objectives: To determine COVID-19 prevalence and the clinical profile of mothers admitted for childbirth at Chinese General Hospital and Medical Center from May 2020 to July 2020. The profile and outcomes of neonates born to these mothers were likewise studied. Materials and Method: A descriptive cross-sectional study was done that included mothers admitted for childbirth who had SARS-CoV-2 RT PCR swab test and their neonates. A total of 408 medical records of mother and neonate dyads were reviewed. Relevant variables such as the patients’ demographic profile, clinical characteristics, co-morbidities and the maternal and neonatal outcomes were obtained. Frequency distributions were made to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 among the patients, as well as maternal and neonatal outcomes. Results: Twenty-two (5.39%) mothers tested positive for COVID-19, while all neonates (n = 22) that underwent RT-PCR swab at the 24th hour of life had negative results. Of the 22 COVID-19 positive mothers, 2 (9.09%) were symptomatic upon admission while 20 (90.09%) were asymptomatic. The following were the key trends among those mothers who tested positive for COVID-19: (1) 81.82% were from ages 20-39 years old, (2) 72.73% were multigravida mothers, (3) 54.55% had normal spontaneous delivery, (4) diabetes mellitus was the only noted comorbidity. Key findings on the neonatal outcomes observed in the study population of both COVID-19 positive and negative cases, include: (1) majority of neonates had an APGAR score of greater than 7 at 1st and 5th minute of life; (2) higher frequency of neonates with Ballard’s score of more than 37 weeks AOG; (3) more male neonates as compared to female neonates; (4) a normal birth weight for majority of cases; (5) 45.45% of neonates born to COVID positive mothers had a length of stay of <48 hours as compared to 72.8% of neonates born to COVID negative mothers; and (6) neonatal pneumonia as the most common comorbid condition in both cases. Conclusion This study noted a prevalence of 5.39% COVID-19 positive mothers. SARS-CoV-2 virus was not detected in all of the neonates born to COVID-19 affected mothers. Neonates delivered to COVID-19 positive mothers had similar trends in the neonatal outcomes when compared to neonates delivered to mother who were COVID-19 negative.
COVID-19

Background: The prone position has been seen to benefit patients experiencing acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, performing this position in pregnant patients has been difficult and raises safety concerns. Objective: The current study aimed to test the use of a supportive pillow (Prone Pillow for Pregnant Patients or 4P) to address concerns regarding pregnant patients in prone position. Methods: The study prospectively evaluated the use of the prone pillow for patient comfort and usability among healthcare workers with qualitative and quantitative measures. Results: A total of three patients were recruited alongside 16 healthcare workers assisting pregnant patients to the prone position. Overall, awake pregnant patients found the pillow to be comfortable while healthcare workers perceived the pillow to be useful in improving quality of care among awake and intubated pregnant patients. Conclusion The 4P is a potentially useful and beneficial product in placing pregnant patients in the prone position during episodes of acute respiratory distress. However, due to the limited sample size, more clinical trials are needed to evaluate the impact of this innovation in improving patient and healthcare worker safety.
Covid-19

Objectives: The use of a scoring system that integrates various factors helps in decision-making and triage for Medically Necessary, Time Sensitive (MeNTS) surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to determine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of cases who were screened and underwent elective gynecologic surgery at a tertiary hospital using the MeNTS tool for prioritization. Methods: A cross sectional study was carried out using data collected through medical chart review of all gynecologic cases screened in a 6-month period, from June 18, 2020 to December 18, 2020. Results: A total of 155 gynecologic cases were screened, with 134 (86.4%) MeNTS cases and 21 (13.5%) non-MeNTS cases. The median length of stay (5 days), the median operating room time (3 hours and 30 minutes), and median estimated blood loss (400ml) were within the acceptable expected outcome as with the scoring system, albeit with some cases (53%) requiring blood transfusion attributed to low baseline hemoglobin levels. There were no cases with post-operative COVID-19 transmission, needing ICU care and intubation, nor mortalities reported. Conclusions The MeNTS scoring system allowed efficient handling of the backlog of elective gynecologic cases with minimal morbidity and absence of mortality. The study supports the utility of this scoring system in addressing the need of the healthcare system not just to optimally utilize and fairly allocate hospital resources but also to ensure the safety of the patient with the best health service delivery during the pandemic.
Covid-19

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 pandemic led to a dramatic loss of human life worldwide and presented an unprecedented challenge to public health. One of the solutions in addressing the problem was mass vaccination in order to attain herd immunity. However, most people were hesitant to be vaccinated particularly due to their fear of the adverse events; hence the goal of this study was to determine the possible adverse events (AEs) experienced during administration of CoronaVac^TM COVID-19 Vaccine.

The objective of the study was to monitorthe occurrence of adverse events within one hour, two to 24 hours, and 25 to 72 hours after administration of the first and second dose of CoronaVac^TM COVID-19 Vaccine in a tertiary government hospital in Pangasinan.

This cross-sectional study was done from February to April 2021 at Region 1 Medical Center. Employees who received the two doses of Sinovac-CoronaVac^TM vaccine and gave their informed consent were included in the study. Participants were monitored closely for adverse events within 30 minutes following administration of the vaccine and were instructed to report any local and systemic AEs to the Hospital Epidemiology Center Office. Individuals were also followed up through telephone to investigate the occurrence of any complaints after 24 to 72 hours.

A total of 353 participants who received the complete doses of CoronaVac^TM were included in the study. The incidence of AEs was higher after the first dose compared with the second dose. After the first dose of CoronaVac^TM 12.5% reported AEs after the 1st hour, 14.2% two to 24 hours after the vaccine, and 1.4% on the 25^th hour up to the 72^nd hour. Pain on injection site was the most common adverse event during the first hour (8.2%). On the 2nd hour up to 24 hours, headache, and myalgia (14.2%) were more evident. Headache was reported in 1.1% of the participants after 25-72 hours of vaccination. After the second dose, only one participant reported multiple AEs such as fatigue, headache, rash and retroorbital pain (1, 0.7%).

In this study, 28.1% of the participants experienced adverse events afterthe first dose of CoronaVac^TM vaccine. AEs were higher after the first dose (28.1%) compared with the second dose (0.3%). Injection site pain was the most common adverse event during the first hour, then headache and myalgia during the 2^nd hour up to 24 hours, and headache on the 25^th – 72^nd hour after vaccination. Only one participant reported several AEs after the 2^nd dose of the vaccine.