In this study, the potential of isolate Pseudomonas lundensis UTAR FPE2 as a hydrocarbon degrader was established. Their biodegradation activity was first detected with the formation of clearing zones on Bushnell-Hass agar plates, with the largest diameter observed on plates supplemented with paraffin, followed by mineral oil and petrol. Utilization of hydrocarbon sources were again detected in broth cultures supplemented with similar hydrocarbon substrates, where the mean viable cell count recovered from hydrocarbon-supplemented broth cultures were higher than the initial inoculum except for napthalene. In both tests, the isolate showed higher degradability towards aliphatic hydrocarbon sources, and the least activity towards the aromatic hydrocarbon naphthalene. The isolate P. lundensis UTAR FPE2 (8 log10 cfu/mL) also degraded crude diesel sample, with 69% degradation during the first three days. To conclude, this study suggests the potential use of this isolate for bioremediation of hydrocarbon-contaminated environments.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of primary care allows for identification of problems in the healthcare system, such as poor health outcomes, inappropriate health services, overuse of unnecessary resources, or underuse of recommended strategies. Assessment of adherence to existing clinical practice guidelines as quality indicators is critical for evaluating the effectiveness of primary care and shaping healthcare policies.

To determine the adherence of primary care providers to existing practice guidelines for common pediatric concerns in remote, rural, and urban areas in the Philippines.

This cross-sectional study included data from the electronic medical records (EMR) of patients aged 19 years and below who consulted at the three pilot sites of the Philippine Primary Care Studies (PPCS) from January to December 2019. Relevant demographic data and quality indicator measures (e.g., immunization history, adolescent smoking history, medication and supplement prescription) were extracted from the EMR by the PPCS data management team. Adherence to existing guidelines on pediatric history taking and management of common illnesses (e.g., diarrhea, upper respiratory tract infections, malnutrition) was evaluated.

This study included 8,724 pediatric patients seen across the three pilot sites from January to December 2019. Immunization history was taken in only 0.4% of pediatric patients. Smoking history was taken in only 6.8% of adolescent patients. Zinc was prescribed in only 40.1% of patients with diarrhea. No infants were prescribed with vitamin A, while iron was prescribed in only 2.5% of children and 3% of adolescent females. In contrast to the recommendations of existing guidelines, antibiotics were prescribed in 38.5% of patients with AGE and 62.5% of patients with viral URTI. Montelukast was prescribed as first-line asthma treatment in 4.7% of cases. Multivitamins were prescribed in 57.2% of all pediatric patients.

Overuse of inappropriate medications and underuse of appropriate interventions were observed in this study. There was low adherence to evaluation of pediatric immunization history, adolescent smoking history, zinc supplementation for diarrhea, and iron and vitamin A supplementation among identified vulnerable population groups. Over prescription of the following were observed: (1) antibiotics for acute gastroenteritis and probable viral URTI, (2) multivitamins for the general pediatric population, and (3) montelukast among newly diagnosed asthma patients.

Background and Objective: Primary care providers are key players in providing quality care to patients and advancing Universal Health Care (UHC). However, effective and quality healthcare delivery may be affected by inadequate knowledge and failure to adhere to evidence-based guidelines among providers. The Philippine Primary Care Studies (PPCS) is a five-year program that pilot tested interventions aimed at strengthening the primary care system in the country. Evidence-based training modules for healthcare providers were administered in Sorsogon and Bataan from the years 2018 to 2021. Module topics were selected based on common health conditions encountered by providers in rural and remote settings. This program aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of training in increasing provider knowledge. Methods: A series of training workshops were conducted among 184 remote- and 210 rural-based primary care providers [nurses, midwives, barangay or village health workers (BHWs)]. They covered four modules: essential intrapartum and newborn care (EINC), integrated management of childhood illness (IMCI), non-communicable diseases (NCD), and geriatrics. A decision support system (UpToDate) was provided as a supplementary resource for all participants. We administered pre-tests and post-tests consisting of multiple-choice questions on common health conditions. Data was analyzed using paired one-tailed t-test, with an alpha of 0.05. Results: The knowledge of nurses, midwives, and BHWs improved after the training workshops were conducted. The largest increase from pre-test to post-test scores were observed among the midwives, with a mean difference (MD) of 32.9% (95% CI 23.9 to 41.9) on the EINC module, MD of 25.0% (95% CI 16.6 to 33.4) in the geriatrics module, and MD of 13.5% (95% CI 6.9 to 20.1) in the NCDs module. The nurses had the greatest improvement in the IMCI module (MD 10.8%, 95% CI 2.5 to 19.1). The knowledge of BHWs improved in all participated modules, with greatest improvement in the NCD module (MD 9.0%, 95% CI 5.77 to 12.14). Conclusions Primary care workshops, even if conducted as single-sessions and on a short-term basis, are effective in improving short-term knowledge of providers. However, this may not translate to long-term knowledge and application in practice. Furthermore, comparisons across provider categories cannot be made as participant composition for each training workshop varied. Ultimately, this study shows enhancing provider knowledge and competence in primary care will therefore require regular and diverse learning interventions and access to clinical decision support tools.
Capacity Building ; Health Workforce ; Philippines ; Primary Health Care

Background: Turnaround time is an integral component of primary healthcare and is a key performance indicator of healthcare delivery. It is defined as the time patients spend during a healthcare facility visit. In this study, turnaround time is defined as the time elapsed from registration to the end of consultation. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the turnaround time of consults in the primary care system in a rural site in the Philippines, and compare turnaround time during the pre-pandemic and COVID-19 pandemic periods. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients seen at the primary care facility under the Philippine Primary Care Studies (PPCS) rural site from April 2019 to March 2021. Patients included in this study were chosen through random sampling. Electronic medical records (EMR) of these patients were reviewed. Turnaround time was computed electronically from time of registration to end of consultation. Descriptive statistics was used to summarize data and report turnaround time. The turnaround time before and during the pandemic was compared using an independent sample t-test (if normally distributed) or Mann Whitney U test (if not normally distributed). A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A random sample of 342 patients out of the total 45,501 patient consults seen at the rural primary healthcare facility from April 2019 to March 2021 were included in this study. The median turnaround time was 29.0 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 68.3), with range of 0.9 to 437.2 minutes. During the pre-pandemic period, the median turnaround time of consults is 29.3 minutes (IQR 70.4) which is 1.8 minutes longer than the pandemic period which showed median turnaround time of 27.5 minutes (IQR 72.7). The difference between the two time periods was not statistically significant (P = 0.39). Conclusion The study showed that the median turnaround time of medical consults was 29.0 minutes, which was shorter by 80 minutes compared to other published Philippine studies. The turnaround time did not differ significantly in the pandemic and prepandemic period, despite new policies and systems that were implemented during the pandemic.
primary care ; electronic medical records ; pandemic ; Philippines