Evaluating healthcare response to COVID-19 across Southeast Asia: A post-Pandemic Reflection and Way Forward

This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of Southeast Asian countries' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly focusing on Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Myanmar. The primary objective is to explore how the pandemic has evolved in these nations, how the respective healthcare delivery systems responded, and the current COVID-19 status within each country. It presents epidemiological trends and governmental strategies adopted in combating the pandemic. The paper also outlines lessons learned and future challenges, highlighting key areas like global health diplomacy, the need for collaboration, clear government agency communication, and a stance against social discrimination. It culminates in an assessment of the postpandemic landscape, discussing the transformation of public health policies and the socio-economic implications of pandemic management.

The evolution of the Medical Journal of Malaysia - beyond a century

No abstract available.

The epidemiology of COVID-19 in ten Southeast Asian countries

INTRODUCTION

Periodic benchmarking of the epidemiology of COVID-19 in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries is critical for the continuous understanding of the transmission and control of COVID-19 in the region. The incidence, mortality, testing and vaccination rates within the ASEAN region from 1 January 2020 to 15 October 2021 is analysed in this paper.

METHODS

COVID-19 data on cases, deaths, testing, and vaccinations were extracted from the Our World in Data (OWID) COVID-19 data repository for all the ten ASEAN countries. Comparative time-trends of the epidemiology of COVID-19 using the incidence rate, cumulative case fatality rate (CFR), delay-adjusted case fatality rate, cumulative mortality rate (MR), test positivity rate (TPR), cumulative testing rate (TR) and vaccination rate was carried out.

RESULTS

Over the study period, a total of 12,720,661 cases and 271,475 deaths was reported within the ASEAN region. Trends of daily per capita cases were observed to peak between July and September 2021 for the ASEAN region. The cumulative case fatality rate (CFR) in Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam, was of 0.9% (N=68), 2.2% (N=2,610), 3.5% (N=142,889), 0.1% (N=36), 1.2% (N=27,700), 4.0% (N=18,297), 1.6% (N=40,424), 0.1% (N=215), 1.7% (N=18,123), and 2.6% (N=21,043), respectively. CFR was consistently highest between January-June 2020. The cumulative mortality rate (MR) was 9.5, 13.7, 51.4, 0.2, 80.3, 32.4, 34.5, 1.6, 23.9 and 19.7 per 100,000 population, respectively. The cumulative test positivity rate (TPR) was 8.4%, 16.9%, 4.6%, 7.5%, 11.1%, 12.9%, 0.5%, 11.7%, and 3.6%, with the cumulative testing rate (TR) at 25.0, 90.1, 27.4, 917.7, 75.8, 177.8, 3303.3, 195.2, and 224.9 tests per 1,000 population in Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam, respectively. The percentage of population that completed vaccinations (VR) was 44.5%, 65.3%, 18.5%, 28.2%, 61.8%, 6.8%, 19.2%, 76.8%, 22.7%, and 10% in Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In 2020, most countries in ASEAN had higher case fatality rates but lower mortalities per population when compared to the third quarter of 2021 where higher mortalities per population were observed. Low testing rates have been one of the factors leading to high test positivity rates. Slow initiation of vaccination programs was found to be the key factor leading to high incidence and case fatality rate in most countries in ASEAN. Effective public health measures were able to interrupt the transmission of this novel virus to some extent. Increasing preparedness capacity within the ASEAN region is critical to ensure that any future similar outbreaks can be dealt with collectively.

Malaysia's third COVID-19 wave - a paradigm shift required

The first case of COVID-19 was reported in Malaysia on the 25 January 2020. By the 20 January 2021, the cumulative numbers reported confirmed cases of COVID-19 had reached 169,379 including 630 deaths. Malaysia has been hit by three waves of COVID-19. This article reports on the three waves, the current situation and some of the possible factors associated. It outlines the need to reassess the overall situation, re-strategize the approach in order to contain the spread. The first COVID-19 wave lasted from 25 January to 16 February 2020, the second wave occurred between the 27 February 2020 and the 30 June 2020. The current third wave began on 8th September 2020.The sudden surge of cases in the third wave was mainly due to the two largest contributors, namely the Benteng Lahad Datu cluster in Sabah state and Kedah's Tembok cluster. The current situation is critical. The daily confirmed cases of COVID-19 continue to soar. The challengers faced by healthcare workers and other front liners is tremendous. Non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and cancer are the leading cause of death in Malaysia. A paradigm shift in the approach is required to ensure the sustainability of the normal healthcare services provided by the government especially for the lower income groups. There is also a need to expedite the tabling of Tobacco Control Bill in coming parliament session which is long overdue. H.E. the King of Malaysia has called on all Malaysians to put aside political, racial and religious differences and show the spirit of loyalty, humanitarianism and steadfastness in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.

Battling COVID-19 pandemic waves in six South-East Asian countries: A real-time consensus review

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 has caused unprecedented public health concerns, triggering an escalated burden to health systems worldwide. The pandemic has altered people's living norms, yet coherently escalating countries' socioeconomic instability. This real-time consensus review aims to describe the epidemiological trends of COVID-19 pandemic across six South-East Asian nations, and countryspecific experiences on pandemic preparedness, responses and interventions.

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?

Correction to: Review of global neurosurgery education: Horizon of Neurosurgery in the Developing Countries

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s41016-020-00194-1.].

From the MJM Editors' Desk: Common errors authors make in submission to the Medical Journal of Malaysia

Proper understanding the 'Instructions to authors' for a particular journal is the key towards successful submission of a manuscript which will lead to it being published. Common errors that are frequently made by authors in their submission to the Malaysia Journal of Malaysia (MJM) that lead to rejection of their submission or requiring major revisions or minor revisions are listed and discussed in this article. Outright rejection prior to even a peer review process may be made for an article due to: it is poorly written or when there is suspicion on the authenticity of the submission, which contains elements that are suspected to be plagiarised, it is a duplicate submission or not in the format required by the MJM. The editor in charge of the issue makes a recommendation to the Editor in Chief for the final decision.

Review of global neurosurgery education: Horizon of Neurosurgery in the Developing Countries

Globally, the discipline of neurosurgery has evolved remarkably fast. Despite being one of the latest medical specialties, which appeared only around hundred years ago, it has witnessed innovations in the aspects of diagnostics methods, macro and micro surgical techniques, and treatment modalities. Unfortunately, this development is not evenly distributed between developed and developing countries. The same is the case with neurosurgical education and training, which developed from only traditional apprentice programs in the past to more structured, competence-based programs with various teaching methods being utilized, in recent times. A similar gap can be observed between developed and developing counties when it comes to neurosurgical education. Fortunately, most of the scholars working in this field do understand the coherent relationship between neurosurgical education and neurosurgical practice. In context to this understanding, a symposium was organized during the World Federation of Neurological Surgeons (WFNS) Special World Congress Beijing 2019. This symposium was the brain child of Prof. Yoko Kato—one of the eminent leaders in neurosurgery and an inspiration for female neurosurgeons. Invited speakers from different continents presented the stages of development of neurosurgical education in their respective countries. This paper summarizes the outcome of these presentations, with particular emphasis on and the challenges faced by developing countries in terms of neurosurgical education and strategies to cope with these challenges.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic

No abstract provided.

Stroke in pregnancy

Stroke is uncommon among young adults. However, the incidence of stroke among young women increases with pregnancy during peripartum and postpartum periods. The relative risk of suffering from haemorrhagic stroke was three times higher than ischemic stroke during these periods when compared with antenatal period. Neuroimaging should be prioritized in order to establish diagnosis and to facilitate treatment in a patient with suspected acute stroke. Prophylaxic anticoagulants should be used in high risk patients. Treatments of acute stroke in pregnant women include anti-platelet and thrombolytic agents. Further studies should be carried as there is lack of high level of evidences to formulate clear guideline for the management of stroke during pregnancy.

Early management of head injury in adults in primary care

Head injury is common and preventable. Assessment of the head injury patient includes airway, cervical spine protection, breathing, circulation, haemorrhage control and the Glasgow Coma Scale. Hypotension, hypoxia, hypocarbia and hypercarbia should be avoided by continuous monitoring of vital signs and hourly head chart to prevent secondary brain injury. This paper aims to assist primary healthcare providers to select the appropriate patient for transfer and imaging for further management of head injury.

Severe traumatic brain injury: outcome in patients with diffuse axonal injury managed conservatively in Hospital Sultanah Aminah, Johor Bahru--an observational study

Patients with isolated severe head injury with diffuse axonal injury and without any surgical lesion may be treated safely without cerebral resuscitation and intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Seventy two patients were divided into three groups of patients receiving treatment based on ICP-CPP-targeted, or conservative methods either with or without ventilation support. The characteristics of these three groups were compared based on age, gender, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), pupillary reaction to light, computerized tomography scanning according to the Marshall classification, duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stays, Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) and possible complications. There were higher risk of mortality (p < 0.001), worse GCS improvement upon discharge (p < 0.001) and longer ICU stays (p = 0.016) in ICP group compared to Intubation group. There were no significant statistical differences of GOS at 3rd and 6th months between all three groups.

Diabetic nephropathy: an observational study on patients attending a joint diabetes renal clinic

Diabetic nephropathy is a major cause of renal failure, accounting for 20% of patients starting dialysis. In clinical trials, effective blood-pressure control, especially by angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), retards the rate of progression of renal failure substantially. We examined these effects in clinical practice by surveying patients at a joint diabetes renal clinic at Glasgow Royal Infirmary from 1989 to 1995. We examined the relationship between progression of diabetic nephropathy, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and the use of ACEIs. The average MAP of the whole group of patients fell by 7%, the urine albumin:creatinine ratio fell by 29%, and the rate of progression as measured by the slope of reciprocal of serum creatinine with time (l/mumol/day) was slowed, from -4.59 to -2.76. This is equal to delaying the necessity for dialysis by about 2 years. The joint clinic met its aim and was cost-effective.