<p>The country’s cardiology centers have been producing subspecialists in the field of Invasive and Interventional Cardiology. To date, 11 hospitals and/or medical centers are involved in training these subspecialists in a 1 to 2-year program. And to this date, there have been no uniform standards and guidelines as to what comprises the basic and/or acceptable training outcomes for the interventionalist in training. This paper describes the development of the core curriculum for an interventional cardiovascular training program to prepare its trainees to be competent in performing invasive diagnostic and interventional cardiovascular procedures as part of comprehensive patient care. The task force for the core curriculum of the interventional training program gathered several officers and leaders of the PSCCI, the training heads of the various interventional programs in the country, as well as experts in the field of cardiology education. Through a series of meetings, consultations, and workshops, the task force laid out the template on which all the training programs would be based. Such a framework considered the international standards regarding minimum caseloads for interventional training and the peculiar situation of each training institution. International standards like the Core Cardiovascular Training Statement (COCATS 4) Task Force 10: Training in Cardiac Catheterizations and the 2020 EAPCI Core Curriculum for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions served as the reference framework for key recommendations. A consensus was achieved that upheld the highest standards of competence without disenfranchising certain institutions due to intricacies and uniqueness of hospital set-up and training situation.p>
Training ; Education ; Curriculum

Background: Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic changed healthcare-seeking behavior and healthcare delivery. Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study using a non-probability sampling of adult patients at the Philippine Heart Center who were diagnosed with ACS-STEMI. Baseline characteristics, clinical profile, management plan, and outcomes of patients were determined and analyzed in both periods. Results: 170 STEMI patients during each period were included in the study. The mean time for the onset of symptoms to consult was 8 hours in both periods. Majority of STEMI patient had undergone primary PCI in both periods. There is a significant decline in the number of patients undergoing primary PCI during the COVID 19 period (n=116, 68%). Fibrinolysis was performed more during the COVID 19 pandemic (n=9, 5%) and none in the pre-COVID 19 period. There was a statistically significant delay in the door-to-wiring time during the pandemic. Composite outcome was significantly higher during this time with 42 patients (25%, p=0.029). Composite outcomes were also higher in STEMI patients with COVID-19 infection (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0989 - 3.2960, p=0.022). Conclusion The study confirmed that there was an increase in the rate of fibrinolysis and medical therapy alone during the COVID-19 period. There was also a significant delay in the door-to-wiring time as well as an increase in composite outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.
ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction ; COVID-19