Identifying COVID-19 cases in outpatient settings.

Case identification is an ongoing issue for the COVID-19 epidemic, in particular for outpatient care where physicians must decide which patients to prioritise for further testing. This paper reports tools to classify patients based on symptom profiles based on 236 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 positive cases and 564 controls, accounting for the time course of illness using generalised multivariate logistic regression. Significant symptoms included abdominal pain, cough, diarrhoea, fever, headache, muscle ache, runny nose, sore throat, temperature between 37.5 and 37.9 °C and temperature above 38 °C, but their importance varied by day of illness at assessment. With a high percentile threshold for specificity at 0.95, the baseline model had reasonable sensitivity at 0.67. To further evaluate accuracy of model predictions, leave-one-out cross-validation confirmed high classification accuracy with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.92. For the baseline model, sensitivity decreased to 0.56. External validation datasets reported similar result. Our study provides a tool to discern COVID-19 patients from controls using symptoms and day from illness onset with good predictive performance. It could be considered as a framework to complement laboratory testing in order to differentiate COVID-19 from other patients presenting with acute symptoms in outpatient care.

The impact of COVID-19 on private and public primary care physicians: A cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: Primary care physicians (PCP) are at a high risk of contracting COVID-19 as they manage patients with fever or respiratory symptoms, but it is intuitive that private and public practice PCPs may face different challenges during this pandemic. This study compared work- and non-work-related concerns, COVID-19's impact on personal and professional lives, and perceived pandemic preparedness between private and public PCPs in Singapore. METHODS: 216 PCPs who were a registered member of either the National University Polyclinics, National University Health System Primary Care Network or College of Family Physicians Singapore, participated in this online cross-sectional study. The data collection period lasted from 6th March 2020 to 29th March 2020. RESULTS: A final sample of 172 questionnaires were analysed. Private PCPs tended to be older and more experienced. Perceived COVID-19 exposure and overall preparedness was high in both groups. More private PCPs perceived their exposure risk as unacceptable, aOR = 3.96 (1.07, 14.62); that they should not be caring for COVID-19 patients, aOR = 3.55 (1.23, 10.24); and perceived more stigma against their loved ones, aOR = 4.27 (1.74, 10.44). Private PCPs felt less well-trained, aOR = 0.05 (0.01, 0.23); and supported, aOR = 0.14 (0.03, 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Private PCPs are more likely to be self-employed or work in smaller practices where COVID-19 infection could mean loss of livelihood. As a healthcare system without primary care is crippled in its ability to manage outbreaks, authorities should respond appropriately to the needs of their general practitioners and family physicians.

Prepared and highly committed despite the risk of COVID-19 infection: a cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians' concerns and coping strategies in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Primary care physicians (PCPs) are first points-of-contact between suspected cases and the healthcare system in the current COVID-19 pandemic. This study examines PCPs' concerns, impact on personal lives and work, and level of pandemic preparedness in the context of COVID-19 in Singapore. We also examine factors and coping strategies that PCPs have used to manage stress during the outbreak. METHODS: Two hundred and sixteen PCPs actively practicing in either a public or private clinic were cluster sampled via email invitation from three primary care organizations in Singapore from 6th to 29th March 2020. Participants completed a cross-sectional online questionnaire consisting of items on work- and non-work-related concerns, impact on personal and work life, perceived pandemic preparedness, stress-reduction factors, and personal coping strategies related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 158 questionnaires were usable for analyses. PCPs perceived themselves to be at high risk of COVID-19 infection (89.9%), and a source of risk (74.7%) and concern (71.5%) to loved ones. PCPs reported acceptance of these risks (91.1%) and the need to care for COVID-19 patients (85.4%). Overall perceived pandemic preparedness was extremely high (75.9 to 89.9%). PCPs prioritized availability of personal protective equipment, strict infection prevention guidelines, accessible information about COVID-19, and well-being of their colleagues and family as the most effective stress management factors. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs continue to serve willingly on the frontlines of this pandemic despite the high perception of risk to themselves and loved ones. Healthcare organizations should continue to support PCPs by managing both their psychosocial (e.g. stress management) and professional (e.g. pandemic preparedness) needs.

The Patient Activation through Community Empowerment/Engagement for Diabetes Management (PACE-D) protocol: a non-randomised controlled trial of personalised care and support planning for persons living with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Personalised care and support planning (CSP) has been shown to improve diabetes outcomes, patient experience and provider morale in the care of persons living with diabetes. However, this has not been confirmed in controlled studies. Patient Activation through Community Empowerment/Engagement for Diabetes Management (PACE-D) is a pragmatic controlled trial that evaluates the effectiveness of personalised CSP in persons living with diabetes in the public primary care setting in Singapore. METHODS: Teamlet-empanelled patients with diabetes at four polyclinics are recruited for this study. Participants who attend either of the two Intervention clinics are sent their investigation results in a care planning letter (CPL) to prepare them for the CSP conversation. This conversation is facilitated by a trained CSP practitioner who engages them in discussion of concerns, goals and action plans, and documents their plans for subsequent review. Participants in the two Control clinics will receive standard diabetes care. Participants will complete two or more CSP conversations (Intervention) or regular consultations (Control) at the annual review visits within the 18 months of the study. The sample size is calculated at 1620 participants, with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) as the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures include patient activation (as measured by PAM-13) and changes in healthcare utilisation and cost. DISCUSSION: This study is a pragmatic trial that evaluates the effectiveness of personalised CSP in persons living with diabetes in a real world setting. It promises to provide insights with regard to the implementation of this model of care in Singapore and the region. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04288362. Retrospectively registered on 28 February 2020.

Ministry of Health Clinical Practice Guidelines: Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Tuberculosis.

The Ministry of Health (MOH) has developed the clinical practice guidelines on Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Tuberculosis to provide doctors and patients in Singapore with evidence-based treatment for tuberculosis. This article reproduces the introduction and executive summary (with recommendations from the guidelines) from the MOH clinical practice guidelines on Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Tuberculosis, for the information of SMJ readers. The chapters and page numbers mentioned in the reproduced extract refer to the full text of the guidelines, which are available from the Ministry of Health website: http://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/healthprofessionalsportal/doctors/guidelines/cpg_medical.html. The recommendations should be used with reference to the full text of the guidelines. Following this article are multiple choice questions based on the full text of the guidelines.

Economic burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the direct medical costs of COPD in two public health clusters in Singapore from 2005 to 2009. METHODS: Patients aged 40 years and over, who had been diagnosed with COPD, were identified in a Chronic Disease Management Data-mart. Annual utilization of health services in inpatient, specialist outpatient, emergency department and primary care settings was extracted from the Chronic Disease Management Data-mart. Trends in attributable costs, proportions of costs and health-care utilization were analyzed across each level of care. A weighted attribution approach was used to allocate costs to each health-care utilization episode, depending on the relevance of co-morbidities. RESULTS: The mean total cost was approximately $9.9 million per year. Inpatient admissions were the major cost driver, contributing an average of $7.2 million per year. The proportion of hospitalization costs declined from 75% in 2005 to 68% in 2009. Based on the 5-year average, attendances at primary care clinics, emergency department and specialist clinics contributed 3%, 5% and 17%, respectively, of overall COPD costs. On average, 42% of the total cost burden was incurred for the medical management of COPD. The share of cost incurred for the treatment of conditions related and unrelated to COPD were 29% and 26%, respectively, of the total average costs. CONCLUSIONS: COPD is likely to represent a significant burden to the public health system in most countries. The findings are particularly relevant to understanding the allocation of health-care resources and informing appropriate cost containment strategies.

Characteristics, and disease control and complications of hypertensive patients in primary-care - a community-based study in Singapore.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertension is a common chronic condition usually managed by primary-care practitioners in Singapore. This study assessed the characteristics, control and complications of non-diabetic hypertensive patients managed at government primary healthcare clinics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 9 clinics was conducted over 1-week in 2006. Five hundred and six non-diabetic hypertensive patients were systematically sampled from all clinic attendees. Data relating to socio-demographic, lifestyle factors, treatment and complications were collected by interviewer-administered questionnaires and review of clinic medical records. Blood pressure (BP) measurements were taken with validated automated sets following a standard protocol. RESULTS: The prevalence of good BP control (<140/90 mmHg) was 37.7% (95% CI: 33.6% to 41.8%). Ninety seven percent were on medication with about half on monotherapy. Seventy percent of patients had a body mass index (BMI) of 23.0 kg/m(2) or higher, 64% did not exercise regularly and 8% were current smokers. After adjusting for age and lifestyle factors, male hypertensive patients had poorer BP control compared to females. Nineteen percent of patients reported at least 1 complication of hypertension, especially cardiac disease. After multivariate analysis and duration of disease, age and the male gender were associated with the presence of hypertensive complications. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients were not controlled to target levels. Male patients were more likely to have poorer control of hypertension and significantly higher risks of complications. Control of BP could be further improved by lifestyle modifications - weight reduction, promotion of physical activity, healthier eating habits and smoking cessation.

Acute respiratory symptoms in adults in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Community studies have shown that approximately 30% of patients with acute respiratory tract symptoms have no identifiable infective aetiology. This may not be applicable in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the infective aetiology in patients who presented to primary care doctors with acute respiratory symptoms. METHODS: A prospective study was carried out in all nine primary care clinics belonging to the National Healthcare Group Polyclinics (NHGPs) in Singapore. The subjects comprised 594 consecutive patients (318 males, 276 females) aged > or = 21 years who presented with complaints of any one of cough, nasal or throat symptoms of <7 days duration. Data collection was through interview using structured questionnaire, physical examination, throat swabs for bacterial culture and nasal swabs for virus identification by immunofluorescence (IF) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Additional PCR was performed on a subsample of 100 patients. Patients were followed-up until resolution of symptoms. RESULTS: The aetiological diagnosis by infective agent is as follows: 150 patients (25.2%) had virus infections, of which 90.7% (136/150) were by rhinovirus. Fourteen patients (2.4%) had bacterial infections, of which 10 were due to group G streptococcus. Group A streptococcus was not detected. Nineteen patients with new pathogens were identified by further PCR. These included parainfluenza 4, human coronavirus OC43, adenovirus, enterovirus and Chlamydia pneumoniae. No pathogen could be identified in 49% of patients. There were no differences in clinical presentation and socio-demographic variables between patients who had viral infections and those in whom no pathogen could be identified. CONCLUSION: In about half of patients who presented at NHGPs, no pathogens could be identified even after PCR. A non-infective aetiology could be considered in these patients.