BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

One of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical education is an increased awareness and use of social media (SocMed) to facilitate learning. However, literature on the use of SocMed in medical education has focused primarily on educator-led teaching activities. Our study aimed to describe SocMed initiatives that were student-led, particularly for information dissemination and peer collaborative learning, and to elicit perceptions of medical students towards such activities.

An online survey on SocMed usage in medical education was sent to all first- and second-year medical students at the University of the Philippines Manila College of Medicine from October to December 2021. The questionnaire collected data on demographics, SocMed habits and preferences, and perceived advantages and disadvantages of SocMed. Descriptive statistics were calculated while the free-text responses were grouped into prominent themes and summarized.

We received a total of 258 responses (71%) out of 361 eligible participants. Overall, 74% found SocMed platforms to be very and extremely helpful; 88% recommended its continued use. The most popular SocMed platforms for different tasks were as follows: Discord for independent study groups and for conducting peer tutoring sessions; Facebook Messenger for reading reminders; Telegram for reading announcements related to academics and administrative requirements, and for accessing material provided by classmates and professors.

The high uptake of SocMed among medical students may be attributed to its accessibility and costefficiency. The use of a particular SocMed platform was dependent on the students’ needs and the platform's features. Students tended to use multiple SocMed platforms that complemented one another. SocMed also had disadvantages, such as the potential to distract from academic work and to become a source of fatigue. Educators must engage with students to understand how SocMed platforms can be integrated into medical education, whether in the physical or virtual learning environment.

Human ; Research Personnel ; Nurses ; Students

Introduction: COVID-19 has emerged as a global problem with vaccines being established as one of the best tools in its control. Of particular interest in dermatology are risks and manifestations of cutaneous reactions from such countermeasures, with strides made in documenting and associating skin reactions with vaccines against COVID-19. This study aimed to determine the incidence of cutaneous adverse reactions in recipients of recombinant ChAdOx1-S and inactivated SARS-COV-2 vaccines among healthcare personnel and employees of UERMMMCI. Methods: A cross-sectional study was done were respondents, chosen through randomized stratified cluster sampling, were given a questionnaire to elicit cutaneous adverse effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines. Results: There were198 respondents, of which 29.3% were male and 70.7% were female, with a mean age of 26.07 years. Of these respondents, 72 (36.36%) received recombinant ChAdOx1-S and 126 (63.64%) received inactivated SARS-COV-2 vaccine. For the first dose, cutaneous reactions developed in 6 (8.33%) recipients of recombinant ChAdOx1-S, and 2 (1.59%) recipients of inactivated SARS-COV-2. For the second dose, no reactions followed vaccination with recombinant ChAdOx1-S while 4 (3.17%) reactions developed after inactivated SARS-COV-2 vaccination. Lesions were mostly confined to the injection site presenting with erythema for both vaccine types. One urticarial, widespread reaction was associated with a second dose of inactivated SARS-COV-2 vaccine. Conclusions Adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccinations have been documented which may be attributed to respective excipients rather than vaccine antigens. Due to the rare occurrence of severe anaphylactic reactions, vaccine use is recommended as they confer protection even to those with prior infections. Documented reactions in this study were observed to be mild and self- limiting similar to larger studies.
Vaccines ; COVID-19 ; Pandemics

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 and Objective: Colorectal cancer (CRC) has the third highest incidence in the Philippines. Currently, there is a paucity in literature that is focused on the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of Filipinos regarding CRC screening. This is the first study in the Philippines that describes this. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study that validated a 52-item Filipino questionnaire on the knowledge on colorectal cancer, willingness to undergo CRC screening, and perceived benefits and barriers to fecal occult blood test (FOBT) and colonoscopy. The study enrolled household heads more than 20 years of age residing in both urban and rural communities in the Philippines. Results: The UP-PGH CRC KAP (University of the Philippines – Philippine General Hospital Colorectal Cancer Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices) and Rawl Questionnaire’s validity and internal consistency were established in a pilot study of 30 respondents. A total of 288 respondents were then enrolled to the main study group with a median age of 54.0. Knowledge scores for prognosis and utility of CRC screening were modest (6.3/12 and 8.4/20, respectively). Perceived benefit scores to FOBT and colonoscopy were high (9.9/12 and 13.9/16, respectively).Median scores to barriers to FOBT and colonoscopy were intermediate (22.5/36 and 35.8/60, respectively). Notably, a vast majority (86.1%) were willing to participate in CRC screening programs initiated by the government, and 46.9% agreed to undergo screening tests even as out-of-pocket expense. Conclusion The UP-PGH CRC KAP Questionnaire as well as the Filipino translation of the Rawl Questionnaire are reliable and valid tools in extensively assessing the knowledge of Filipinos on CRC and willingness to undergo screening, as well as the benefits of and barriers to FOBT and colonoscopy. Knowledge scores were modest suggesting that directed educational campaigns and awareness programs can aid in increasing awareness about CRC and its screening. Household income and highest educational attainment were significantly positively correlated with knowledge scores, and perceived benefits of and barriers to CRC screening. Scores were generally comparable between urban and rural communities.
Knowledge ; Attitudes

Background and Objective: Convalescent plasma therapy (CPT) may reduce the risk of disease progression among patients with COVID-19. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CPT in preventing ICU admission among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods: In this open-label randomized controlled trial, we randomly assigned hospitalized adult patients with COVID-19 in a 1:1 ratio to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care or standard of care alone. The primary endpoint was ICU admission within first 28 days of enrolment. Primary safety endpoints include rapid deterioration of respiratory or clinical status within four hours of convalescent plasma transfusion and cumulative incidence of serious adverse events during the study period including transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI), transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO), severe allergic reactions, and transfusion-related infections. Results: A total of 22 patients were assigned to receive convalescent plasma as an adjunct to standard of care and 22 to receive standard of care alone. The median time from onset of COVID-19 symptoms to study enrolment was eight days (IQR, 4 to 10). Two patients (9.1%) in the CPT group and one patient (4.5%) in the control group were admitted to the ICU. The primary outcome measure, ICU admission, was not different between the two groups (q-value >0.9). No patient who received convalescent plasma had rapid deterioration of respiratory/clinical status within four hours of transfusion and none developed TRALI, TACO, anaphylaxis, severe allergic reactions, or transfusion-related infections. There was also no significant difference in the secondary outcomes of 28-day mortality (two patients in the CPT group and none in the control group, q-value >0.90), dialysis-free days, vasopressor-free days, and ICU-free days. Conclusions Among hospitalized COVID-19 patients, no significant differences were observed in the need for ICU admission between patients given CPT as adjunct to standard of care and those who received standard of care alone. Interpretation is limited by early termination of the trial which may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference.
COVID-19 ; COVID-19 Serotherapy

BACKGROUND

Primary care for pediatric patients focuses on providing comprehensive, accessible, and coordinated healthcare from the neonatal period to adolescence. The implementation and use of electronic medical records (EMR) in pediatric primary care facilities is an efficient strategy to gather necessary information on the epidemiology of common pediatric diseases in the Philippines.

This study aimed to determine the frequency distribution of pediatric diseases in a rural primary healthcare facility in the Philippines.

This cross-sectional study reviewed the EMR of all pediatric patients who consulted in a primary care facility in Samal, Bataan from April 2019 to March 2021. Data gathered include sex, age in years, chief complaint, diagnosis, and month of consultation. Data was summarized using descriptive statistics.

A total of 14,462 pediatric consults were recorded from April 2019 to March 2021. There were slightly more male patients (52.1%). The mean age of the patients was 6.5 years (standard deviation 5.22). The highest number of consults came from the 1- to 4-year-old age group (41.5%). The most common chief complaints were cough (45.9%), fever (25.5%), and colds (24.9%). The most frequent diagnoses were upper respiratory tract infections (47.4%), followed by lower respiratory tract infections (6.9%), and skin and soft tissue infections (5.3%). Majority of the consults for respiratory tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections, gastroenteritis, asthma, and dermatitis were in the 1- to 4-year-old age group. Urinary tract infections and otitis media or externa were recorded more frequently in the 5- to 9-year-old age group.

Respiratory tract infections, followed by skin and soft tissue infections, were the most frequently identified diseases in children consulting a primary care facility at a rural site in the Philippines. The most common chief complaints, defined as the primary reason for seeking consult, were cough, fever, and colds. Data was gathered through EMR review, which may aid in the planning of programs and policies to improve primary care service delivery.

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: 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

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the demographics, clinical profile, treatment, and outcomes of retinoblastoma patients seen at medical institutions in the Philippines between two time periods: 2010 to 2015 and 2016 to 2020.

This was a multicenter, analytical, cohort study using review of medical charts and databases of retinoblastoma patients seen in 11 medical institutions from 2010 to 2020.

There were 636 patients (821 eyes) included in this study: 330 patients were seen in 2010 to 2015 while 306 in 2016 to 2020. More cases per annum were seen in the latter timeline. The number of patients with unilateral disease was not significantly different between the two time periods (p=0.51). Age at onset of symptom, age at initial consultation, and delay in consult were also not significantly different between the two time periods (p > 0.05). Patients had significantly different distributions of intraocular grades (p < 0.0001) and systemic staging (p < 0.0001) between the two time periods. Enucleation was the most common surgical treatment performed in both timelines. There was significant difference in the status of patients based on the need for systemic chemotherapy (p < 0.01). There was significant difference in outcome between the two time periods, including the proportions of living and deceased patients.

This study compared the most comprehensive data on retinoblastoma patients in the country. There was no improvement in early health seeking behavior based on similar age at initial consult and delay in consult. Enucleation remained the most common treatment mode as opposed to chemotherapy due to similar percentage of patients with unilateral disease, an indication for enucleation rather than chemotherapy.