INTRODUCTION: Singapore has the world's second most efficient healthcare system while costing less than 5% GDP. It remains unclear whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is cost-effective for treating intermediate-low risk severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients in a highly efficient healthcare system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A two-phase economic model combining decision tree and Markov model was developed to assess the costs, effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of transfemoral (TF) TAVI versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in intermediate-low risk patients over an 8-year time horizon. Mortality and complications rates were based on PARTNER 2 trial cohort A and Singapore life table. Costs were mainly retrieved from Singapore National University Health System database. Health utility data were obtained from Singapore population based on the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). A variety of sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In base case scenario, the incremental effectiveness of TF-TAVI versus SAVR was 0.19 QALYs. The ICER of TF-TAVI was S$33,833/QALY. When time horizon was reduced to 5 years, the ICER was S$60,825/QALY; when event rates from the propensity analysis was used, the ICER was S$21,732/QALY and S$44,598/QALY over 8-year and 5-year time horizons, respectively. At a willingness to pay threshold of S$73,167/QALY, TF-TAVI had a 98.19% probability of being cost-effective after 100,000 simulations. The model was the most sensitive to the costs of TF-TAVI procedure. CONCLUSION TF-TAVI is a highly cost-effective option compared to SAVR for intermediate-low risk severe AS patients from a Singapore healthcare system perspective. Increased procedure experience, reduction in device cost, and technology advance may have further increased the cost-effectiveness of TF-TAVI per scenario analysis.

Spinal manipulation has been an effective intervention for the management of various musculoskeletal disorders. However, the mechanisms underlying the pain modulatory effects of spinal manipulation remain elusive. Although both biomechanical and neurophysiological phenomena have been thought to play a role in the observed clinical effects of spinal manipulation, a growing number of recent studies have indicated peripheral, spinal and supraspinal mechanisms of manipulation and suggested that the improved clinical outcomes are largely of neurophysiological origin. In this article, we reviewed the relevance of various neurophysiological theories with respect to the findings of mechanistic studies that demonstrated neural responses following spinal manipulation. This article also discussed whether these neural responses are associated with the possible neurophysiological mechanisms of spinal manipulation. The body of literature reviewed herein suggested some clear neurophysiological changes following spinal manipulation, which include neural plastic changes, alteration in motor neuron excitability, increase in cortical drive and many more. However, the clinical relevance of these changes in relation to the mechanisms that underlie the effectiveness of spinal manipulation is still unclear. In addition, there were some major methodological flaws in many of the reviewed studies. Future mechanistic studies should have an appropriate study design and methodology and should plan for a long-term follow-up in order to determine the clinical significance of the neural responses evoked following spinal manipulation.

Hand injury is the second most common work-related musculoskeletal injury among physical therapists (PTs) and other manual therapy professionals such as osteopaths, physiotherapists, chiropractors, acupuncturists and massage therapists. However, the nature and extent of this problem have not been fully explored yet. Therefore, the objective of this study was to review the existing literature published on the prevalence, risk factors, consequences, and prevention of hand injuries among PTs and similar healthcare professionals. The lifetime prevalence of hand injuries was about 15%-46%, and the annual prevalence was reported as 5%-30%. Thumb injuries were found to be the most prevalent of all injuries, accounting more than 50% of all hand-related problems. The most significant risk factors for job-related hand injuries were performing manual therapy techniques, repetitive workloads, treating many patients per day, continued work while injured or hurt, weakness of the thumb muscles, thumb hypermobility, and instability at the thumb joints. PTs reported modifying treatment technique, taking time off on sick leave, seeking intervention, shifting the specialty area, and decreasing patient contact hours as the major consequences of these injuries. The authors recommend that PTs should develop specific preventive strategies and put more emphasis on the use of aids and equipment to reduce the risk of an unnecessary injury.

Spinal manipulation is a manual treatment technique that delivers a thrust, using specific biomechanical parameters to exert its therapeutic effects. These parameters have been shown to have a unique dose-response relationship with the physiological responses of the therapy. So far, however, there has not been a unified approach to standardize these biomechanical characteristics. In fact, it is still undetermined how they affect the observed clinical outcomes of spinal manipulation. This study, therefore, reviewed the current body of literature to explore these dosage parameters and evaluate their significance, with respect to physiological and clinical outcomes. From the experimental studies reviewed herein, it is evident that the modulation of manipulation's biomechanical parameters elicits transient physiological responses, including changes in neuronal activity, electromyographic responses, spinal stiffness, muscle spindle responses, paraspinal muscle activity, vertebral displacement, and segmental and intersegmental acceleration responses. However, to date, there have been few clinical trials that tested the therapeutic relevance of these changes. In addition, there were some inherent limitations in both human and animal models due to the use of mechanical devices to apply the thrust. Future studies evaluating the effects of varying biomechanical parameters of spinal manipulation should include clinicians to deliver the therapy in order to explore the true clinical significance of the dose-response relationship.
Animals ; Humans ; Manipulation, Spinal

International borders to Vanuatu closed on 23 March 2020 due to the global COVID-19 pandemic. In May–July 2020, the Government of Vanuatu focused on the safe and timely return of citizens and residents while ensuring Vanuatu remained COVID-19 free. Under Phase 1 of repatriation, between 27 May and 23 June 2020, 1522 people arrived in the capital, Port Vila, and were placed in compulsory government-mandated 14-day quarantine in 15 hotels. Pre-arrival health operations included collection of repatriate information, quarantine facility assessments, training for personnel supporting the process, and tabletop and functional exercises with live scenario simulations. During quarantine, health monitoring, mental health assessments and psychosocial support were provided. All repatriates completed 14 days of quarantine. One person developed symptoms consistent with COVID-19 during quarantine but tested negative. Overall health operations were considered a success despite logistical and resource challenges. Lessons learnt were documented during a health sector after-action review held on 22 July 2020. Key recommendations for improvement were to obtain timely receipt of repatriate information before travel, limit the number of repatriates received and avoid the mixing of “travel cohorts”, ensure sufficient human resources are available to support operations while maintaining other essential services, establish a command and control structure for health operations, develop training packages and deliver them to all personnel supporting operations, and coordinate better with other sectors to ensure health aspects are considered. These recommendations were applied to further improve health operations for subsequent repatriation and quarantine, with Phase 2 commencing on 1 August 2020.