Objective: This cross-sectional, prospective surveillance study sought to determine the prevalence of novel respiratory viruses among domestic ducks in Central Luzon that are known to have frequent contact with wild avian species. Such contact may lead to novel virus spillover events that may harm domestic poultry as well as humans. Methods: From March 2019 to January 2020, cross-sectional and prospective surveillance for viruses among domestic ducks (Anas luzonica) was conducted by periodically collecting oropharyngeal swabs from ducks on 54 farms across three municipalities within Central Luzon (Region III). A flock of 30 sentinel domestic ducks was also sampled four times after being confined in the Candaba swamp. The resultant 1740 swab samples were pooled (5 samples/pool, 348 pools) by site and screened with molecular assays for respiratory viruses from multiple viral families. Results: Two farms yielded samples positive for avian influenza virus in Candaba, where adolescent ducks are known to freely mix with wild birds as they graze in rice fields. Overall, the prevalence of avian influenza virus was 2.3% (8/348 pools). Sequencing revealed three pools with highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N6, one with low pathogenicity H5N8, and one with H5 with an unspecified neuraminidase. All the pooled specimens tested were negative for influenza C, adenoviruses, coronaviruses and enteroviruses. Discussion: Although this study had several limitations, it found supportive evidence that domestic ducks are acquiring avian influenza viruses from wild bird species. These findings underscore recommendations that duck farmers should seek to prevent domestic ducks from mixing with wild avian species.

In this report, we sought to demonstrate that freshwater sampling for migrating bird-associated novel respiratory virus incursions is possible and more desirable than the alternative approach of capturing and swabbing wild migrating birds. Freshwater sampling should be considered as an alternative approach for pre-pandemic pathogen surveillance.

Humans ; Informed Consent

Purpose: Prostate cancer (PCa) screening can lead to potential over-diagnosis/over-treatment of indolent cancers. There is a need to optimize practices to better risk-stratify patients. We examined initial longitudinal outcomes of mid-life men with an elevated baseline prostate-specific antigen (PSA) following initiation of a novel screening program within a system-wide network. Materials and Methods: We assessed our primary care network patients ages 40 to 49 years with a PSA measured following implementation of an electronic health record screening algorithm from 2/2/2017–2/21/2018. The multidisciplinary algorithm was developed taking factors including age, race, family history, and PSA into consideration to provide a personalized approach to urology referral to be used with shared decision-making. Outcomes of men with PSA ≥1.5 ng/mL were evaluated through 7/2021. Statistical analyses identified factors associated with PCa detection. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was defined as Gleason Grade Group (GGG) ≥2 or GGG1 with PSA ≥10 ng/mL. Results: The study cohort contained 564 patients, with 330 (58.5%) referred to urology for elevated PSA. Forty-nine (8.7%) underwent biopsy; of these, 20 (40.8%) returned with PCa. Eleven (2.0% of total cohort and 55% of PCa diagnoses) had csPCa. Early referral timing (odds ratio [OR], 4.58) and higher PSA (OR, 1.07) were significantly associated with PCa at biopsy on multivariable analysis (both p<0.05), while other risk factors were not. Referred patients had higher mean PSAs (2.97 vs. 1.98, p=0.001). Conclusions Preliminary outcomes following implementation of a multidisciplinary screening algorithm identified PCa in a small, important percentage of men in their forties. These results provide insight into baseline PSA measurement to provide early risk stratification and detection of csPCa in patients with otherwise extended life expectancy. Further follow-up is needed to possibly determine the prognostic significance of such mid-life screening and optimize primary care physician-urologist coordination.

Male ; Humans ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; Cell Line, Tumor ; Cell Differentiation ; Carcinoma, Neuroendocrine

INTRODUCTION: This is a retrospective analysis of outcomes by Singapore Medical Council (SMC) disciplinary tribunals in cases involving junior doctors. We aimed to classify the types of unprofessional behaviour and consider appropriate measures for remediation and prevention. METHODS: SMC's annual reports from 1979 to 2017 and published grounds of decision from 2008 to 2017 were examined using two screening levels to identify cases involving junior doctors. Cases were sorted into five outcome categories: (a) professional misconduct; (b) fraud and dishonesty; (c) defect in character; (d) disrepute to the profession; and (e) acquitted. RESULTS: A total of 317 cases were identified, of which 13 (4.1%) involved junior doctors: 4 (30.8%) cases involved professional misconduct, 4 (30.8%) cases involved fraud and dishonesty, 3 (23.1%) cases saw an acquittal, and one case each involved defect in character and disrepute to the profession. The four cases of professional misconduct highlight the need to differentiate medical errors due to systems factors from those due to individual culpability, by applying analytical tools such as root cause analysis and Unsafe Act Algorithms. Disciplining the individual alone does not help prevent the recurrence of similar medical errors. We found that fraud and dishonesty was an important category of unprofessional behaviour among junior doctors. CONCLUSION While the frequency of unprofessional behaviour among junior doctors, as determined by the SMC disciplinary tribunal, is low (4.1%), this study highlights that complaints against medical doctors often involve systems issues and individual factors. Unprofessional behaviours related to fraud and dishonesty need special attention in medical school.