Background: Using a previously unreported Peruvian registry of patients treated for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), this study explored whether wedge resection and lobectomy were equivalent regarding survival and impact on radiologic-pathologic variables. Methods: This observational, analytical, longitudinal study used propensity scorematched (PSM) analysis of a single-center retrospective registry of 2,570 patients with pathologic stage I–II NSCLC who were treated with wedge resection (n=1,845) or lobectomy (n=725) during 2000–2020. After PSM, 650 cases were analyzed (resection, n=325;lobectomy, n=325) through preoperative and clinical variables, including patients with ≥1 lymph node removed. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were created for 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional-recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Results: The principal complication was operative pain persisting >7 days for lobectomy versus wedge resection (58% vs. 23%, p=0.034) and shorter hospital stays for resection than for lobectomy (5.3 days vs. 12.8 days, p=0.009). The 5-year OS (84.3% vs. 81.2%, p=0.09) and DFS (79.1% vs. 74.1%, p=0.07) were similar and statistically insignificant between resections and lobectomies, respectively. LRFS was worse overall following wedge resection than lobectomy (79.8% vs. 91.1%, p<0.02). Nevertheless, in the PSM analysis, both groups experienced similar LRFS when the resection margin was >10 mm (90.9% vs. 87.3%, p<0.048) and ≥4 lymph nodes were removed (82.8% vs. 79.1%, p<0.011). Conclusion Both techniques led to similar OS and DFS at 5 years; however, successful LRFS required a wedge resection with a surgical margin and adequate lymph node removal to obtain outcomes similar to lobectomy.

Background: Using a previously unreported Peruvian registry of patients treated for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), this study explored whether wedge resection and lobectomy were equivalent regarding survival and impact on radiologic-pathologic variables. Methods: This observational, analytical, longitudinal study used propensity scorematched (PSM) analysis of a single-center retrospective registry of 2,570 patients with pathologic stage I–II NSCLC who were treated with wedge resection (n=1,845) or lobectomy (n=725) during 2000–2020. After PSM, 650 cases were analyzed (resection, n=325;lobectomy, n=325) through preoperative and clinical variables, including patients with ≥1 lymph node removed. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were created for 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional-recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Results: The principal complication was operative pain persisting >7 days for lobectomy versus wedge resection (58% vs. 23%, p=0.034) and shorter hospital stays for resection than for lobectomy (5.3 days vs. 12.8 days, p=0.009). The 5-year OS (84.3% vs. 81.2%, p=0.09) and DFS (79.1% vs. 74.1%, p=0.07) were similar and statistically insignificant between resections and lobectomies, respectively. LRFS was worse overall following wedge resection than lobectomy (79.8% vs. 91.1%, p<0.02). Nevertheless, in the PSM analysis, both groups experienced similar LRFS when the resection margin was >10 mm (90.9% vs. 87.3%, p<0.048) and ≥4 lymph nodes were removed (82.8% vs. 79.1%, p<0.011). Conclusion Both techniques led to similar OS and DFS at 5 years; however, successful LRFS required a wedge resection with a surgical margin and adequate lymph node removal to obtain outcomes similar to lobectomy.

Background: Using a previously unreported Peruvian registry of patients treated for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), this study explored whether wedge resection and lobectomy were equivalent regarding survival and impact on radiologic-pathologic variables. Methods: This observational, analytical, longitudinal study used propensity scorematched (PSM) analysis of a single-center retrospective registry of 2,570 patients with pathologic stage I–II NSCLC who were treated with wedge resection (n=1,845) or lobectomy (n=725) during 2000–2020. After PSM, 650 cases were analyzed (resection, n=325;lobectomy, n=325) through preoperative and clinical variables, including patients with ≥1 lymph node removed. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were created for 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and locoregional-recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Results: The principal complication was operative pain persisting >7 days for lobectomy versus wedge resection (58% vs. 23%, p=0.034) and shorter hospital stays for resection than for lobectomy (5.3 days vs. 12.8 days, p=0.009). The 5-year OS (84.3% vs. 81.2%, p=0.09) and DFS (79.1% vs. 74.1%, p=0.07) were similar and statistically insignificant between resections and lobectomies, respectively. LRFS was worse overall following wedge resection than lobectomy (79.8% vs. 91.1%, p<0.02). Nevertheless, in the PSM analysis, both groups experienced similar LRFS when the resection margin was >10 mm (90.9% vs. 87.3%, p<0.048) and ≥4 lymph nodes were removed (82.8% vs. 79.1%, p<0.011). Conclusion Both techniques led to similar OS and DFS at 5 years; however, successful LRFS required a wedge resection with a surgical margin and adequate lymph node removal to obtain outcomes similar to lobectomy.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the physical activity patterns of the University of Santo Tomas college students in Manila, Philippines in terms of participation in moderate to vigorous physical activity, frequency and duration of participation, METS-min/week, sitting habits and walking activities. METHODS: A total of 551 males and 850 female college students (N=1401) from the University of Santo Tomas were randomly selected for the study. After anthropometric measurements (height, weight, BMI and Waist circumference) were taken, the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (short form) was answered by the students. RESULTS: A greater percentage of male college students engage in vigorous physical activity (66.97%) in terms of frequency per week (2.42 + 1.56 days), duration (119.52 + 70.70 minutes) and MET-min/week (2252.77 + 2789.81 METS). On the other hand, more female college students engage in moderate physical activity in terms of frequency per week (4.69 + 2.04 days). However, male college students who engage in moderate physical activity spend a longer duration (106.02 + 108.55 minutes) and higher METmin/week (1945.59 + 2721.02 METS) than their female counterpart. CONCLUSION It is important to engage in physical activity on a daily basis, with recommendations given by the American Heart Association and the World Health Organization. Appropriate physical activity assists young people to develop healthy musculoskeletal tissues, cardiovascular system, neuromuscular awareness and maintain a healthy body weight and composition. It has also been associated with psychological benefits in young people by improving control over anxiety and depression, good selfperception and expression, as well as avoidance of tobacco, alcohol and drug use.

OBJECTIVE: Circuit class therapy is a cost-efficient model of treatment that can be beneficial in a setting with limited resources. Current literature has conflicting results regarding which is a more effective approach to stroke rehabilitation: focusing on functional training or on improving impairments. This pilot study provides preliminary information comparing the effects of a task-oriented versus an impairment-focused circuit class therapy on walking ability among patients with chronic stroke. METHOD: Eighteen participants with a single episode of chronic stroke and limited mobility were randomized into task-oriented circuit class (task group) (n=9) and impairment-focused circuit class (impairment group) (n=9). Both groups underwent intervention thrice a week for four weeks. Blind examination was done using the Ten Meter Walk Test for comfortable gait velocity (CGV) and fast gait velocit(FGV), Time Up and Down Stairs (TUDS), and Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT). RESULTS: All participants completed the treatment sessions without adverse effects. After four weeks of treatment, the task group showed statistically significant within-group change in CGV (0.12±0.08, p=0.003) and FGV (0.25±0.22, p=0.007). The impairment group only showed statistically significant improvement in 6MWT (25.80±31.2, p=0.038). There were no statistically significant changes between the groups in all outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS The preliminary data from this pilot study suggest either program can improve walking-related outcomes and may not be different, although this needs to be confirmed using an appropriately-powered trial.

Background: The passage of the Universal Health Care (UHC) Act in the Philippines in early 2019 intensified the need to ensure equitable health investments by the government. Exploring the different criteria and indicators that are used to determine areas that are most in need of health services can help local and national health authorities determine priorities for health investments given finite resources. Methods: A systematic review of literature on determinants of health equity and other indicators was conducted as pre-work to generate discussion points to the roundtable discussion participated by all major key stakeholders. Shared insights and expertise were thematically analyzed to produce a policy paper with consensus policy recommendations. Results: Based on the review of the literature and the discussion, indicators (mainly physical inaccessibility and socioeconomic factors) for identifying Geographically Isolated and Disadvantaged Areas (GIDA) in DOH Administrative Order 185, s. 2004 is used to prioritize municipalities for health investments. Review of other policies and guidelines to determine the level of health needs and prioritizing investments yielded to four laddered domains: geographic, population characteristics (e.g., social and cultural determinants of access), health system (e.g., health service delivery), and health status. These domains may provide a more equitable set of metrics for health investment. The Local Investment Plan for Health (LIPH) is the current process used for health-related investments at the local level and may be revised to be more responsive to the requirements set by the UHC Act 2018. Hot spotting to concentrate health services by communities may be a more rapid approach to investment planning for health. Bed capacity as a specific metric in the UHC Act 2018 highlights the need for a review of the Hospital Licensure Act 2004. Conclusion and Recommendations To aid in determining priorities for health investments, a comprehensive integrated analysis of resources, determinants, and indicators should be done to determine the need and the gaps in the available resources. Innovative strategies can also be best implemented such as mathematical models or formulas. Lastly, current strategies in the development, monitoring, and evaluation of investment planning for health at different levels should be strengthened, expanded, and harmonized with other existing development plans.
Universal Health Care ; Health Equity ; Investments

Background: Through the years of improving quality health service delivery, hospital bed capacity in the Philippines has remained to be a persistent challenge. In light of the aim of the Universal Health Care Act to protect and promote the right to health of every Filipino, one metric used to identify areas that are in most need or are under served, is the number of public hospital beds vis a vis the catchment population. Methods: The systematic review of literature was utilized to generate a policy brief presented to the invited stakeholders of the policy issue for the roundtable discussion participated by all key stakeholders of the policy issue. Evidence and insights were thematically analyzed to generate consensus policy recommendations. Results: With the current hospital bed availability and maldistribution, the Philippines still faces compounded issues in addressing healthcare demands. Currently, the request for increasing bed capacity is done through legislation. In context, this request is also parallel in expanding service capacity through the allocation of more funds and personnel. The ratio of private and charity beds must ensure to have equity among all patients of varying segments of the population. Enjoining private hospitals to share bed capacity for public service was also explored given appropriate subsidies. Conclusion and Recommendation To ensure equity in health service delivery, it is imperative to assess, strategize, and conduct prioritization of the needs of government hospitals for increased bed capacity, considering the distribution, socio-demographic profile, and health needs of the catchment population.
Privatization ; Philippines ; Hospital Bed Capacity

: Background. Inequities in health care exist in the Philippines due to various modifiable and non-modifiable determinants. Through the years, different interventions were undertaken by the government and various stakeholders to address these inequities in primary care. However, inequities still continue to persist. The enactment of the Universal Health Care (UHC) Act aims to ensure that every Filipino will have equitable access to comprehensive and quality health care services by strengthening primary care. As a step towards UHC, the government endeavors to guarantee equity by prioritizing assistance and support to underserved areas in the country. This paper aims to review different interventions to promote equity in the underserved areas that could aid in needs assessment. Methods: A search through PUBMED and Google Scholar was conducted using the keywords, “inequity,” “primary care” and “Philippines.” The search yielded more than 10,000 articles which were further filtered to publication date, relevance to the topic, and credibility of source. A total of 58 full-text records were included in the review. Results and Discussion: In the Philippines, inequities in primary care exist in the context of health programs, facilities, human health resources, finances, and training. These were recognized by various stakeholders, from government and private sector, and nongovernment organizations, taking actions to address inequities, applying different strategies and approaches but with a shared goal of improving primary care. On another end, social accountability must also be instilled among Filipinos to address identified social and behavioral barriers in seeking primary care. With political commitment, improvement in primary care towards health equity can be achieved. Conclusion and Recommendation To address inequities in primary care, there is a need to ensure adequate human resources for health, facilities, supplies such as medications, vaccination, clean water, and sources of funds. Moreover, regular conduct of training on healthcare services and delivery are needed. These will capacitate health workers and government leaders with continuous advancement in knowledge and skills, to be effective providers of primary care. Institutionalizing advocacy in equity through policies in healthcare provision would help realize the aims of the Universal Health Care Act.
Philippines ; Universal Health Care ; Primary Health Care

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of death in the Philippines and can present as acute coronary syndrome. Hospitalization for ACS has epidemiologic and economic burden. In fact, last 2017, there were 1.52% or 152 admissions for every 10,000 hospitalized patients for medical conditions in PhilHealth-accredited hospitals locally. However, coronary angioplasty was performed in only less than 1% of these cases mainly because of its cost and the out-of-pocket expense that the treatment entail, when primary percutaneous intervention has been proven to be effective in reducing mortality in STEMI and early invasive intervention performed during index hospitalization for NSTEMI is likewise recommended. Moreover, there is a big disparity between the current case rates for ACS for medical therapy alone and for invasive intervention compared to the actual ACS hospitalization cost.

1) To propose revisions to the current PhilHealth case rates for acute coronary syndrome (ACS); and 2) To determine the budget impact of the proposed ACS case rates.

The Philippine Heart Association with the assistance of a technical working group undertook the study. A panel of experts composed of general and invasive cardiologists from Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao was formed. The ACS hospitalization costs based on the recent study by Mendoza were presented and discussed during the focus group discussions with the panelists. Issues pertinent to their localities that may affect the costs were discussed. The proposed revised costs on the particular ACS conditions and therapeutic regimens were then voted and agreed upon. A budget impact analysis of the proposed case rates was then performed.

The proposed case rates for ACS ranged from Php 80,000 (for low risk unstable angina given medical treatment) to Php 530,000 (for ST-elevation myocardial infarction initially given a thrombolytic agent then underwent PCI which necessitated the use of three stents). The budget impact analysis showed that the proposed ACS rates would require an additional PHP 1.5 billion to 2.3 billion during the first year of a 3- versus 5-year implementation period, respectively. The period of implementation will be affected by budgetary constraints as well as the availability of cardiac catheterization facilities in the country.

The proposed revised PhilHealth hospitalization coverage for ACS is more reflective or realistic of the ACS hospitalization costs in contrast with the current PhilHealth case rates. The corresponding budget impact analysis of these proposed case rates showed that PHP 7.6 billion is needed for full implementation. However, given the budget constraints, the percentage of the total costs for the first and subsequent years of implementation may be modified.

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has epidemiologic and economic burden. The coverage for hospitalization in the local setting is much less than the actual costs. Many patients do not consent to or avail of the optimal and timely management because of financial challenges.

The paper aimed to propose revised PhilHealth case rates/packages for ACS, namely: 1) unstable angina (UA), 2) non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and 3) STelevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

A consensus panel was organized to provide inputs such as cost and other matters pertaining to the revision of the PhilHealth ACS case rates/packages. The results of the cost of hospitalization of the different ACS conditions derived from a study on hospitalization cost for ACS were presented to the panel. Several focused group discussions were held afterward for propositioning new case rates through votation and by nominal group technique, using the costs from the study as the bases of rate adjustment.

Final costs agreed upon by the consensus panel for medical management alone for UA, NSTEMI, and STEMI were adjusted or amended in increments of Php 20,000, (80,000, 100,000, and 120,000, respectively). Thrombolysis of a patient admitted for STEMI increased the cost to Php 140,000. An additional cost of Php 150,000 was added on top of the cost for medical management and coronary angiogram for NSTE- ACS for PCI with use of a single stent. For STEMI, the same category had an additional cost of Php 180,000. For each additional stent used for all clinical scenarios undergoing PCI, Php 65,000 was added, to cover up to a total of 3 stents.

Based on the consensus process with Philippine Heart Association ACS panelists, the cost proposed ranges from 80,000 pesos to 530,000 pesos depending on the clinical scenarios.