1.Profile of pediatric patients with dengue fever/dengue hemorrhagic fever over a five-year period (2000-2004)
Jonathan G. Lim ; Salvacion R. Gatchalian ; Ma. Rosario Z. Capeding
Pediatric Infectious Disease Society of the Philippines Journal 2010;11(1):26-34
Objectives: This study was conducted to determine the clinico-demographic profile of pediatric patients who were admitted for dengue infection at the Research Institute for Tropical Medicine (RITM) from 2000 to 2004.
Methods: This is a retrospective, descriptive study. Charts of patients who were less than 19 years of age and were admitted at the RITM due to confirmed dengue (using paired dengue HI titer results) were reviewed.
Conclusion: The clinico-demographic profile of patients involved in the study was very similar to that of other studies done, both locally and abroad. By using Spearman's correlation of ranks, the study showed that there was no significant relationship between the severity of dengue infection based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Grade and whether it was a primary or secondary infection with r=.018, p-value=.025.
Human
;
Male
;
Female
;
Adolescent
;
Child
;
Child Preschool
;
Infant
;
DENGUE
;
DENGUE HEMORRHAGIC FEVER
2.2021 clinical practice guidelines in the evaluation and management of pediatric community-acquired pneumonia
Ma. Victoria S. Jalandoni-Cabahug, M.D. ; Maria Rosario Z. Capeding, M.D. ; Kristine Alvarado-Dela Cruz, M.D. ; Mark Joseph S. Castellano, M.D. ; Maria Nerissa A. De Leon, M.D. ; Jay Ron O. Padua, M.D. ; et al.
Pediatric Infectious Disease Society of the Philippines Journal 2023;24(1):121-175
Preface
The Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia (PCAP) was
initiated by the Philippine Academy of Pediatric Pulmonologists, Inc. (PAPP) and the Pediatric Infectious Disease Society of the
Philippines (PIDSP), in cooperation with Philippine Pediatric Society, Inc. (PPS) way back in 2004. Several CPG updates were then
undertaken by the PAPP PCAP CPG Task Force from 2008 to 2016. Clinically-relevant research questions were answered with recent
and current recommendations based on evidence from local and international data.
The 2021 PCAP CPG initiative was envisioned in March 2018 upon the recommendations of the 2018 PAPP Board for the purpose of
updating the evidence in the PCAP CPG 2016 clinical questions. This led to the collaboration of PAPP and PIDSP to develop this CPG.
Individual members were identified from each society as content experts to form the Steering Committee along with a clinical
epidemiologist and technical writer as review experts. The committee identified the scope and target end user of the CPG as well as
additional clinical questions to be included in the 2021 update aside from the questions on the previous CPGs. Selected members from
the two societies formed the Technical Working Group (TWG) who did the literature search, appraisal of evidences, and formulation
of recommendations. These recommendations were then presented to the stakeholders who became part of the consensus panel.
There was no identified conflict of interest among the CPG developers, TWG members and stakeholders. A survey to determine
potential competing interests were conducted during the development of this CPG. This initiative was fully funded by the PAPP and
PIDSP societies.
The 2021 PCAP CPG significantly differs from the previous CPGs in several aspects. First, the current guideline is a consensus between
two pediatric societies. Second, much of the literature review has been centered on meta-analyses or systematic reviews instead of
individual studies. Finally, appraisal of published literature was based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development
and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Such methodological differences may provide difficulties in defining evolution of care through the
years.
As identified in the previous CPG updates, there is lack of local data hence most of the evidences gathered came from international
studies. The applicability of such data to the local setting needs to be critically assessed for its value and relevance. Corollary to this,
several gaps in knowledge are identified and these may serve as a guide for future research.
3.A narrative review of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine choices for greater access and protection against pneumococcal diseases in the Philippines.
Maria Margarita M. LOTA ; Ma. Rosario Z. CAPEDING ; Fernando B. GARCIA JR. ; John Robert C. MEDINA ; Jeremiah A. SERRANO ; Carlo R. LUMANGAYA ; Vicente Y. BELIZARIO JR.
Acta Medica Philippina 2025;59(4):151-158
BACKGROUND
Pneumococcal vaccination has been widely used for the prevention of pneumococcal disease, with two types of vaccines available since 2009. With the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation of incorporating pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) in National Immunization Programs (NIPs) worldwide, a ten-valent PCV (PHiD-CV) was initially introduced in the Philippines in 2012. This, however, transitioned to the use of the 13-valent PCV (Prevnar) subsequent to the recommendation of the Formulary Executive Council in 2014.
OBJECTIVEThis review aimed to present evidence on pneumococcal disease and vaccine inclusion in the Philippine NIP from 2005 - 2021.
METHODSThis narrative review compiled articles on Pneumococcus from January 2005 to October 2021, sourcing literature from databases such as BIOSIS Preview, CAB Direct, Embase, Google Scholar, and others.
RESULTSIn the Philippines, there was a shift in prevalent serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae among children under five following the introduction of PCV13 in the National Immunization Program in 2014, with serotype 14 becoming the most common by 2018, and a significant reduction in isolates reported in 2020, where only serotypes 5, 19A, and 23F were identified among invasive strains. The immunogenicity results of a potential vaccine candidate should be factored into the overall evidence when conducting a reassessment of PCV.
CONCLUSIONAs part of the decision making about the inclusion of the PCVs in the NIP of the Philippines, various factors such as local epidemiology, vaccine supply, cost, and programmatic characteristics must be careful weighed. Enhancing laboratory and surveillance capacity are essential to provide evidencebased decision-making in terms of existing serotype distribution and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profile in the country. With the introduction of a new affordable formulation of a 10-valent PCV offering a comparable serotype coverage, the reassessment of choice of PCV with the consideration of all three formulations, namely PCV13, PHiD-CV, and SIIPL-PCV, may be warranted.
Bacteria ; 10-valent Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine ; 13-valent Pneumococcal Vaccine ; Pneumococcal Vaccines ; Philippines