Objectives: During the second coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) surge, cases increased sharply due to low awareness and compliance with measures to limit disease spread. Health literacy (HL) is an important component of public health initiatives, and schools are potential sources of health education to increase HL via the presentation of COVID-19 educational modules. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved an online questionnaire administered to students from 5 high schools in Surabaya and Sidoarjo, Indonesia, 6-7 weeks after the start of government-issued directives restricting public gatherings. We collected data on each respondent’s age, gender, parental education, and socioeconomic variables. HL was determined by the Health Literacy Measure for Adolescents. We additionally measured their attitudes and behaviors related to preventing the spread of COVID-19. The students were asked if they watched the COVID-19 module at school, their feelings about vaccination, and preferred online sources of COVID-19-related information. Results: Most of the 432 respondents had viewed COVID-19 modules at school. Module exposure was associated with significantly higher total and domain-specific HL and more positive attitudes toward government-issued COVID-19 restrictions on travel and public gatherings (p<0.05). However, behaviors to prevent COVID-19 spread and vaccine acceptance were not associated with module exposure. Most students chose social media as their source of COVID-19-related information. Conclusions Schools can provide information to increase adolescents’ HL and the public’s support for health initiatives to prevent or limit the spread of COVID-19.

Purpose: Hybrid learning has been chosen as an alternative method in the conduction of clinical skill lectures during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic since students need to learn skills applied in emergency situations. This study aims to analyze students’ attitudes between hybrid and online learning methods. Methods: A non-randomized study was conducted between hybrid group (HG) and online group (OG) on three courses (intravenous [IV]-line insertion, nasogastric tube [NGT] insertion, and neonatal resuscitation). We developed a preformed validated questionnaire to assess students’ attitudes in five domains (willingness, understanding, capacity, self-efficacy, and intended behavior). The questionnaire was applied at the pre- and post-intervention. Results: A total of 100 participants were included (n=49 in HG, n=51 in OG). Post-course attitudes were significantly higher in online (IV-line, p=0.000; NGT, p=0.000; resuscitation, p=0.000) and hybrid (IV-line, p=0.000; NGT, p=0.000; resuscitation, p=0.000) groups compared to their pre-course. There were no significant differences in post-course attitude between groups (IV-line, p=0.072; NGT, p=0.163; resuscitation, p=0.146). Normalized-gain scores of all subjects were higher in HG (IV-line, p=0.012; NGT, p=0.085; resuscitation, p=0.033). Conclusion In conclusion, hybrid learning could be considered as a better alternative in clinical skill lectures to maximize students’ attitudes, especially during COVID-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become a global concern. Recently, Indonesia contributed the third-highest number of new COVID-19 cases in the world. We provide supporting information for COVID-19 management. This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Dr. Soetomo General Hospital. Researchers collected demographics, comorbidity, initial laboratory tests, and complications data of patients. This study performed a comparative, survival, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Survival analysis showed a decrease in the probability of survival associated with an increase in the variables of age, diabetes, white blood cell (WBC) count, and neutrophils percentage, and a decrease in lymphocytes percentage during hospitalization. Lymphocyte percentage, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), WBC count, neutrophil percentage, had an accuracy 0.727 (95%CI 0.642-0.812; p<0.001), 0.726 (95%CI 0.641-0.812; p<0.001), 0.706 (95%CI 0.615-0.796; p<0.001), and 0.700 (95%CI 0.612-0.788; p<0.001) respectively, in predicting worse outcome. Our study suggests routine complete blood count tests in the admission of a patient with COVID-19 infections, which can be used to determine the survival and prognosis of hospitalized patients.