METHODS: We searched the PubMed and Google Scholar on 15th May 2020, with search terms including SARS-COV-2, coronavirus, COVID-19, hyposmia, anosmia, ageusia and dysgeusia. The articles included were cross sectional studies, observational studies and retrospective or prospective audits, letters to editor and short communications that included a study of a cohort of patients. Case reports, case-series and interventional studies were excluded.
DISCUSSION: A total of 16 studies were selected. Incidence of smell and taste dysfunction was higher in Europe (34 to 86%), North America (19 to 71%) and the Middle East (36 to 98%) when compared to the Asian cohorts (11 to 15%) in COVID-19 positive patients. Incidence of smell and taste dysfunction in COVID-19 negative patients was low in comparison (12 to 27%). Total incidence of smell and taste dysfunction from COVID-19 positive and negative patients from seven studies was 20% and 10% respectively. Symptoms may appear just before, concomitantly, or immediately after the onset of the usual symptoms. Occurs predominantly in females. When occurring immediately after the onset of the usual symptoms, the median time of onset was 3.3 to 4.4 days. Symptoms persist for a period of seven to 14 days. Patients with smell and taste dysfunction were reported to have a six to ten-fold odds of having COVID-19.
CONCLUSION: Smell and taste dysfunction has a high incidence in Europe, North America, and the Middle East. The incidence was lower in the Asia region. It is a strong risk factor for COVID-19. It may be the only symptom and should be added to the list of symptoms when screening for COVID- 19.
METHODS: Consensus-driven approach between authors from the six selected countries was applied. Country specific policy documents, official government media statements, mainstream news portals, global statistics databases and latest published literature available between January-October 2020 were utilised for information retrieval. Situational and epidemiological trend analyses were conducted. Country-specific interventions and challenges were described. Based on evidence appraised, a descriptive framework was considered through a consensus. The authors subsequently outlined the lessons learned, challenges ahead and interventions that needs to be in place to control the pandemic.
RESULTS: The total number of people infected with COVID-19 between 1 January and 16 November 2020 had reached 48,520 in Malaysia, 58,124 in Singapore, 3,875 in Thailand, 470,648 in Indonesia, 409,574 in Philippines and 70,161 in Myanmar. The total number of people infected with COVID- 19 in the six countries from January to 31 October 2020 were 936,866 cases and the mortality rate was 2.42%. Indonesia had 410,088 cases with a mortality rate of 3.38%, Philippines had 380,729 cases with a mortality rate of 1.90%, Myanmar had 52,706 cases with a mortality rate of 2.34%, Thailand had 3,780 cases with a mortality rate of 1.56%, Malaysia had 31,548 cases with a mortality rate of 0.79%, and Singapore had 58,015 cases with a mortality rate of 0.05% over the 10- month period. Each country response varied depending on its real-time situations based on the number of active cases and economic situation of the country.
CONCLUSION: The number of COVID-19 cases in these countries waxed and waned over the 10-month period, the number of cases may be coming down in one country, and vice versa in another. Each country, if acting alone, will not be able to control this pandemic. Sharing of information and resources across nations is the key to successful control of the pandemic. There is a need to reflect on how the pandemic affects individuals, families and the community as a whole. There are many people who cannot afford to be isolated from their families and daily wage workers who cannot afford to miss work. Are we as a medical community, only empathising with our patients or are we doing our utmost to uphold them during this time of crisis? Are there any other avenues which can curb the epidemic while reducing its impact on the health and socio-economic condition of the individual, community and the nation?
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study conducted in SGH during the pandemic with an online self-administered questionnaire composed of two parts, the socio-demographic characteristics, and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS).
RESULTS: A total of 105 healthcare workers responded to this study. A questionnaire in both Bahasa Melayu and English was used. The findings showed that all healthcare workers had mild anxiety, with the majority experiencing mild stress (57.1%), and almost half of the respondents experiencing mild depression (41%). Female subjects had a significant higher mean score in anxiety level and stress level compared to male subjects (10.0±3.20 vs. 8.6±2.93, p<0.05; 14.1±4.76 vs. 10.7±3.70, p<0.05, respectively). Staff who were transferred from other units to handle COVID-19 cases experienced more psychological symptoms. There were significant correlations between the depression, anxiety and stress levels among the healthcare workers and the number of children they had (r=0.739, p=0.001; r=0.642, p=0.001; r=1, p =0.001 respectively). However, the stress level among the healthcare workers was reversely correlated with their years of working experience (r=-0.199, p=0.042).
CONCLUSION: This study identified some socio-demographic factors associated with increased levels of stress, anxiety and depression among the healthcare workers during pandemic, which may lay ground for future interventions.
METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study where 25 male in-patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz. Demographics, clinical data and CT images of these patients were reviewed by 2 senior radiologists.
RESULTS: In total there were 25 patients (all males; mean age [±SD], 21.64±2.40 years; range, 18-27 years). Patients with abnormal chest CT showed a relatively low normal absolute lymphocytes count (median: 2.2 x 109/L) and absolute monocyte count (median: 0.5 x 109/L). Lactate dehydrogenase was elevated in 5 (20%) of the patients. The procalcitonin level was normal while elevated levels of alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, platelet and C-reactive protein were common. Baseline chest CT showed abnormalities in 6 patients. The distribution of the lesions were; upper lobe 3 (12%) lower lobe 3 (12%) with peripheral distribution 4 (16%). Of the 25 patients included, 4 (16%) had ground glass opacification (GGO), 1 (4%) had a small peripheral subpleural nodule, and 1 (4%) had a dense solitary granuloma. Four patients had typical CT features of COVID-19.
CONCLUSION: We found that the CT imaging showed peripheral GGO in our patients. They remained clinically stable with no deterioration of their respiratory symptoms suggesting stability in lung involvement. We postulate that rapid changes in CT imaging may not be present in young, asymptomatic, non-smoking COVID-19 patients. Thus the use of CT thoraxfor early diagnosis may be reserved for patients in the older agegroups, and not in younger patients.
METHODS: An extensive search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), prospective case series studies that evaluated therapies COVID-19. The outcomes searched for were mortality, recovery rate, length of hospital stay and clinical improvement from January to May 15, 2020. Independent reviewers searched, identified, screened, and related studies were included.
RESULTS: Total of five RCTs on 439 patients and seventeen case series involving 1656 patients were found in the specified review period that reported the use of Lopinavir, Ritonavir, Remdesivir. Oseltamivir, Ribavirin in patients with COVID-19; but none of which showed efficacy of antiviral therapy. Such current findings impede researchers from recommending an appropriate and effective antiviral therapy against COVID-19, making it a serious concern for the global community.
DISCUSSION: In the present pandemic and any future epidemics, all the related authorities should pursue many more RCTs, cohort and case series for a prospective outcome in the management and treatment guidelines.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study where women aged between 20-80 years were recruited via convenient sampling from villages in Long Banga, Sarawak over a five-day outreach programme. Cervicovaginal selfsamples were obtained and screened for the presence of high-risk human papillomavirus DNA (HR-HPV) using the careHPVTM Test. A self-administered questionnaire was also administered to determine the sociodemographic and perception towards the self-sampling method.
RESULTS: The 55 women recruited consist of ethnic backgrounds of Penan (58.18%), Kenyah (25.45%), Iban (5.45%), Saban (3.64%), Kelabit (3.64%), Malay (1.82%) and Chinese (1.82%). The prevalence of HR-HPV was 1.85% (n=1/55). Nearly 80% of the women were unemployed, and more than half have had attended primary education. Nine (16.4%) have heard about HPV, and seven (13%) knew HPV infection could cause cervical cancer. Three of them had HPV vaccination, and only one (1.85%) knew the brand of the HPV vaccine. Although 40% preferred self-sampling over clinician-collection, only ten (18.2%) women have completed the self-collection perception questionnaire.
CONCLUSION: Primary HPV DNA screening using the selfsampling method can be carried out in the remote areas during the COVID-19 pandemic without compromising mobility restriction.