METHODS: We conducted an online survey among neurosurgery residents in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand from May 22 to 31, 2020 using Google Forms. The 33-item questionnaire collected data on elective and emergency neurosurgical operations, ongoing learning activities, and health worker safety.
RESULTS: A total of 298 of 470 neurosurgery residents completed the survey, equivalent to a 63% response rate. The decrease in elective neurosurgical operations in Indonesia and in the Philippines (median, 100% for both) was significantly greater compared with other countries (P < 0.001). For emergency operations, trainees in Indonesia and Malaysia had a significantly greater reduction in their caseload (median, 80% and 70%, respectively) compared with trainees in Singapore and Thailand (median, 20% and 50%, respectively; P < 0.001). Neurosurgery residents were most concerned about the decrease in their hands-on surgical experience, uncertainty in their career advancement, and occupational safety in the workplace. Most of the residents (n = 221, 74%) believed that the COVID-19 crisis will have a negative impact on their neurosurgical training overall.
CONCLUSIONS: An effective national strategy to control COVID-19 is crucial to sustain neurosurgical training and to provide essential neurosurgical services. Training programs in Southeast Asia should consider developing online learning modules and setting up simulation laboratories to allow trainees to systematically acquire knowledge and develop practical skills during these challenging times.
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the leading causes of all-cause hospitalizations and their predictive factors in the Malaysian multi-ethnic SLE patients.
METHODS: This is a retrospective study involving 300 SLE patients. Demographic data and details of hospitalizations from the year 1988 until 2019 were reviewed. Baseline and latest disease activity (SLEDAI-2 K) and SLICC/ACR damage index (SDI) scores were evaluated. To be eligible for this study, their SLE diagnosis and disease duration was at least one year; this is to ensure that the baseline disease damages were measured at least after 6 months of diagnosis and subsequent disease damage indexes were captured.
RESULTS: Majority were of Chinese ethnicity 150 (50%). The cohort's median age was 48 (18-82) years and median disease duration was 13 (1-52) years. 133 (44.3%) had SDI score of ≥1 at baseline (early damage). 69 (23%) had developed new organ damage during this study period.There were 222 (74%) patients ever hospitalized from this cohort. The main cause of hospitalization was lupus flare which included concurrent infection (n = 415 admissions, 46%), followed by elective admissions for procedures and others (n = 284 admissions, 31.5%). Admissions for treatment and disease related complications were 13.8%. 8.7% of admissions were due to infections alone. Median length of stay for SLE-related cause admissions was longer compared to non-SLE related causes. Jointly predictive factors for hospitalization were anti-phospholipid syndrome (OR 5.82), anti-Smith (OR 6.30), anti-SSA (OR 3.37), serositis (OR 14.56), neurological (OR 5.52) and high baseline SDI (OR 1.74), all p
METHODS: Orthopaedic surgeons nationwide were invited through email and text messages to answer an online self-administered questionnaire collecting demographic information, COVID-19 exposure experience, perception of risk, and impact on orthopaedic practice.
RESULTS: Of the respondents, 4.7% and 14.0% were involved in frontline treatment for COVID-19 patients with non-orthopaedic and orthopaedic problem, respectively. Respondents working in Ministry of Health had highest percentage of involvement as frontliner, 7.8% (8/103) and 20.4% (21/103) for non-orthopaedic and orthopaedic related COVID-19 treatment, respectively (not significant). Their main concern was an infection of family members (125/235, 53.2%). Majority of respondents were still working (223/235, 94.9%), running outpatient clinics (168/223, 75.3%), and continued with their semi-emergency (190/223, 85.2%) and emergency surgeries (213/223, 95.5%). Of the surgeons, 11.2% (25/223) did not screen their patients for COVID-19 prior to elective surgeries, 30.9% (69/223) did not have any training on proper handling of personal protective equipment (PPE), 84.8% (189/223) make decision to manage more conservatively due to COVID-19 and 61.9% (138/223) had their income affected. Of the surgeons, 19.3% (43/223) started using telehealth facilities.
CONCLUSION: Direct exposure to treatment of COVID-19 patients among the respondent is low and the main concern was infecting their family member. There are still several surgeons who did not conduct preoperative COVID-19 screening and practice without proper PPE training.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 80 adult patients who were scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomised to two groups: Group BM: Baska mask (n = 40) and Group IG: i-gel (n = 40). The assessment focused on ease of insertion, number of attempts, insertion time, number of corrective manoeuvres, oropharyngeal leak pressure, tidal volume, peak airway pressure (PAP) and post-insertion complications.
RESULTS: Group IG showed a significantly shorter median insertion time (13.3 [interquartile range, IQR 7.8] vs. 17.0 [IQR 9.6] s; P < 0.001), a higher percentage in the 'very easy' ease of insertion category (62.5% vs. 10.0%; P < 0.001), a higher percentage in the no corrective manoeuvre category (92.5% vs. 72.5%; P = 0.003) and a higher percentage in the no post-operative throat pain category (67.5% vs. 32.5%; P = 0.011) than Group BM. However, Group BM showed a significantly higher generated PAP than Group IG (12.7 [1.8] and 11.5 [2.2] cm H2O, respectively; P = 0.010). There were no significant differences in other parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: The i-gel was better than the Baska mask in terms of ease of insertion, speed of insertion, fewer corrective manoeuvres and less post-operative throat pain. However, the Baska mask had a better cuff seal, as shown by a higher generated PAP.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using retrospective data from January 2000 to May 2002 was performed pertaining to elective colorectal surgery, cholecystectomy and inguinal hernia repairs. Appropriateness of antibiotic administration was determined based on compliance with national and internationally accepted guidelines on prophylactic antibiotic prescribing policy. A single dose or omission of antibiotic administration was judged appropriate for cholecystectomy and inguinal hernia repair, while up to 24 hours' dosing was considered appropriate practice for colorectal surgery.
RESULTS: Of 419 cases, there were 55 (13.1%) colorectal procedures, 97 (23.2%) cholecystectomies and 267 (63.7%) inguinal hernia repairs. Antibiotics were administered in a total of 306 (73%) cases, with single-dose prophylaxis in only 125 (41%) of these. Prophylaxis was inappropriately prolonged in 80%, 52% and 31% of colorectal, cholecystectomy and inguinal hernia cases, respectively. The corresponding mean duration of anti-biotic administration was 2.4+/-2.2, 1.6+/-1.8 and 1.1+/-1.3 days, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Antibiotic prophylaxis in elective surgery continues to be administered haphazardly. This study supports close surveillance of antibiotic utilization by a dedicated team, perhaps consisting of microbiologists or pharmacists, to minimize inappropriate administration.