JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Wednesday, July 23, 2025

Medical challenges of COVID- 19

by

1756 days ago
20200930

T&T is now ex­pe­ri­enc­ing the ‘sec­ond wave’ of this COVID-19 pan­dem­ic and while in the month of Au­gust, we wit­nessed num­bers in­creas­ing ex­po­nen­tial­ly, we were be­ing told that this def­i­nite up­ward tra­jec­to­ry of the virus was in keep­ing with the so-called ‘Log phase’ of the virus. The con­cern then was how high and how long this steep part of the curve will ex­ist. The ma­jor thrust of break­ing the trans­mis­sion of this virus was placed square­ly on the re­spon­si­bil­i­ty of the pub­lic to ad­here to all safe­ty pro­to­cols.

I had pre­vi­ous­ly stat­ed in an ar­ti­cle of 1/6/20 in this news­pa­per that the MOH had done a sat­is­fac­to­ry job in han­dling the pan­dem­ic. I write in an at­tempt to re­view my own state­ment.

One of the most strik­ing find­ings com­ing out of the col­lect­ed da­ta so far is the rise in num­bers in the younger age groups. This was the group that dom­i­nat­ed the min­gling, the par­ty­ing and the flout­ing of the reg­u­la­tions, par­tic­u­lar­ly the non-wear­ing of masks. The most alarm­ing find­ing is that there are al­most dai­ly deaths, with a to­tal of 75 at this time, high­est in the el­der­ly and in those with co-mor­bidi­ties. Ques­tion is, how did these el­der­ly pa­tients con­tract the virus? Were they al­so min­gling in pub­lic spaces or did the young ones take it home to them? Here­in lies a point I was labour­ing amongst those I knew—that the young ones will con­tract the virus, be­come asymp­to­matic car­ri­ers, take it to their old­er folks, and the lat­ter will be the ones to suc­cumb.

There was a think­ing by the par­ty­ing folks that the virus was gone and that they were safe to min­gle, to par­ty both in their own homes and else­where, beach­es in par­tic­u­lar. The ra­tio­nale em­ployed was that they all knew each oth­er, were fam­i­ly and they were all safe.

We must have failed in reach­ing the good sense of these delin­quents. The mes­sage seemed to have been lost some­where. My own ob­ser­va­tion is that the MOH slipped. I make ref­er­ence to my ar­ti­cle of the 1/6/20 in this news­pa­per where I wrote, “My fear that the pub­lic will start to let down their guard as they mis­in­ter­pret and mis­un­der­stand that the ap­par­ent re­duc­tion in the num­ber of new cas­es in­di­cates we are safer now. This false sense of safe­ty can cost us dear­ly. Now is the time for the MOH to in­ten­si­fy their mass ed­u­ca­tion pro­grammes, em­pha­sis­ing it’s not the ma­jor­i­ty do­ing the right thing who will win but that it takes on­ly one per­son to do the wrong thing”.

I stat­ed then that the pop­u­la­tion need­ed to be bom­bard­ed by ed­u­ca­tion­al videos demon­strat­ing the sim­ple cor­rect tech­niques of wear­ing the masks and wash­ing the hands. Again, we had the time.

But, in this qui­et phase, how much pre-plan­ning was be­ing done? Just how pro-ac­tive were we? We nev­er heard about not “if” but “when” the sec­ond phase comes. The talk was fever­ish and about elec­tions. We were so bom­bard­ed by the cam­paign ads, ad nau­se­um.

Prime time news hour was hi­jacked by the pol­i­tics while Rome was go­ing to go on fire! For sure, much went astray dur­ing the elec­tions, whether some want to ad­mit it or not. Cau­tion was thrown to the winds even by those who should be ex­em­plars! Thank­ful­ly, there were many of us guid­ed by good sense. This ‘qui­et’ pe­ri­od should have been for us to step up with our pub­lic health ed­u­ca­tion ads and ramp up our com­mu­ni­ty test­ing.

Of the lack of ad­e­quate test­ing at that phase, we have no in­for­ma­tion on what ex­ist­ed in the com­mu­ni­ty. Pub­lic health ed­u­ca­tion pro­grammes are few and in­ad­e­quate as it re­lates to COVID-19. They need to be im­proved in fre­quen­cy, graph­ics and con­tent and the pub­lic needs to be bom­bard­ed by mass ed­u­ca­tion pro­grammes. There should be more colour­ful fly­ers and posters and while some are fund­ing bill boards with po­lit­i­cal pro­pa­gan­da meant for a few, it would be more na­tion­al­is­tic if these bill­boards bore mes­sages to the ef­fect of ‘Mask Up!’.

This method has changed many trends in the mor­bid­i­ty and mor­tal­i­ty of chron­ic dis­eases in de­vel­oped coun­tries in ear­li­er years. I am shocked at how lit­tle our young peo­ple un­der­stand about this con­di­tion. The MOH has a chal­lenge to reach this group.

The MOH has to be com­mend­ed for leg­is­lat­ing the use of masks. It sent the sig­nal that the MOH was se­ri­ous in its fight against this virus.

Our cul­ture at times seem to bor­der on in­dis­ci­pline and law­less­ness. As such, many need the heavy hand of the law, and it is very un­for­tu­nate that manda­to­ry wear­ing of masks was not le­galised pri­or to the elec­tions in an­tic­i­pat­ing the cul­ture of some here. But, we all know well, the heavy politi­cis­ing of the pan­dem­ic pre-elec­tions could in no way ex­tend to com­mon sup­port for such a mea­sure.

Sim­i­lar­ly, an­nounc­ing the clo­sure of beach­es and bars on a Sat­ur­day to take ef­fect on a Mon­day morn­ing, shows we do not un­der­stand the cul­ture here. Clear­ly, the virus was at bay and would have been re­leased on Mon­day! Hikes in gas prices take im­me­di­ate ef­fect on bud­get day. Fu­ture de­ci­sions must fac­tor in this as­pect. The dan­ger is with the delin­quent few.

HOTBED OF UN­CER­TAIN­TY

Since mid-Au­gust, we have not been pro­vid­ed with an ac­cu­rate dai­ly fig­ure for num­ber of cas­es re­port­ed on that spe­cif­ic day. In­stead, the fig­ure giv­en to the pub­lic can in­clude cas­es that go as far back as days to over a week. How­ev­er, the MOH Epi­demi­ol­o­gist seems to have this dai­ly fig­ure and right­ly so, yet, we are not privy to it. In­deed, this rais­es a hot bed of un­cer­tain­ty and doubt in the con­cerned pub­lic’s mind. Is there some­thing we are not sup­posed to know or on­ly know it when time­ly? Ef­fec­tive dis­sem­i­na­tion of in­for­ma­tion to the pub­lic is im­por­tant and in­deed, it is our right to know.

The MOH de­ci­sion to have home care of those asymp­to­matic to mild cas­es and fur­ther, de­liv­er pulse oxime­ters to them and have cas­es in­volved in mon­i­tor ing the course of their own con­di­tion is al­so very com­mend­able.

In ear­ly years, when neb­u­lis­ers were be­ing pre­scribed for asth­mat­ics at home, this was as­so­ci­at­ed with an in­crease in mor­tal­i­ty for the sim­ple rea­son that pa­tients over re­lied on their neb­u­liz­er and pre­sent­ed at a de­layed time to the A&E.

The ma­jor pit­fall that comes with home care of COVID-19 cas­es is re­ly­ing on their symp­toms, es­pe­cial­ly the ab­sence of dys­p­noea or a feel­ing of dif­fi­cul­ty in breath­ing. I wish to em­pha­sise a clin­i­cal point raised on the me­dia up­date. There ex­ists a dis­crep­an­cy or a marked dis­con­nect be­tween low lev­els of oxy­gen in the blood (hy­pox­emia) and rel­a­tive­ly ab­sent or mild symp­toms of SOB. This so called ‘Hap­py or Silent Hy­pox­emia’ phe­nom­e­non can re­sult in rapid de­te­ri­o­ra­tion of a pa­tient and death. There­fore, pa­tients need to be vig­i­lant in this re­gard and in those pa­tients at home equipped with pulse oxime­ters, re­ly­ing on symp­toms alone is not best prac­tice. Pa­tients are hope­ful­ly be­ing giv­en a fly­er ex­plain­ing this phe­nom­e­non when be­ing giv­en the oxime­ter. In fact, a ma­jor sign to note is any in­crease in the res­pi­ra­to­ry rate (Tachyp­noea ) that can be an in­valu­able sig­nal of im­pend­ing com­pro­mised lung func­tion.

While the par­al­lel health sys­tem seems to now have sat­is­fac­to­ry ca­pac­i­ty with the new dis­charg­ing guide­lines, screen­ing at the com­mu­ni­ty lev­el is poor and no one can be sat­is­fied with our TEST­ING ca­pa­bil­i­ties at this time.

TEST­ING MUST BE A PRI­OR­I­TY

With­out rapid anti­gen test­ing in the com­mu­ni­ty, we can nev­er know the bur­den of our spread and to say num­bers are drop­ping, will leave un­cer­tain­ty and doubt while pro­pelling some delin­quents. Fi­nal­ly, af­ter weeks of lengthy de­lays, there seems to be some progress in han­dling the back­log of cas­es wait­ing on re­port­ing. We are told the prob­lem is not in test­ing but in re­port­ing.

How does that help? The trend was al­ways that the so called 2nd wave re­bounds hard­er. Now, is the re­al test. The num­bers were al­ways known to be go­ing to rise. We cre­at­ed new beds. We added ex­tra staff. But, did we an­tic­i­pate that with added num­bers meant in­creased sam­ples for test­ing and there­fore, in­crease staff at the TPHL?

Long be­fore the min­is­ter stat­ed re­peat­ed­ly the hitch was not at CARPHA, the lat­ter had al­ready put out a state­ment that they had no out­stand­ing sam­ples to test. The usu­al very con­fi­dent min­is­ter had to open­ly apol­o­gise to pa­tients for lengthy de­lays in them ac­quir­ing their test re­sult. Sam­ples from To­ba­go had to be sent to Trinidad and sam­ples from SWRHA were be­ing sent to as far as San­gre Grande and Port-of-Spain.

The de­cen­tral­iz­ing of test­ing ser­vices, set­ting up new test­ing sites and ma­chines were be­ing told to us since March. As much as there must be a process such as ac­quir­ing the ap­pro­pri­ate test­ing kits, (de­mand-sup­ply chain), val­i­dat­ing ma­chines, train­ing staff etc, it does seem an un­usu­al­ly lengthy pe­ri­od of time get­ting this as­pect of the sys­tem go­ing. The in­ter­val of swab­bing a sus­pect case and ac­cess­ing that re­port is a crit­i­cal pe­ri­od. The Min­is­ter of Health should fo­cus more on pro­vid­ing up­dates on pro­cure­ment de­tails, staff re­cruit­ment and de­ploy­ment, and plans to avoid a 3rd and 4th wave, and in­deed, nit­pick­ing those busi­ness­es that can in fact func­tion rather than pre­sent­ing clin­i­cal de­tails or oth­er so­cial ills. We are hap­py To­ba­go and SWRHA are now seem­ing­ly com­ing on stream with their own test­ing ca­pa­bil­i­ties.

DEATHS AND CO-MO­PRBIDI­TIES

The num­bers of deaths are be­ing pre­sent­ed and this is a crit­i­cal part of pub­lic in­for­ma­tion.

But, to qual­i­fy it by ref­er­enc­ing the fig­ure to the glob­al pro­ject­ed fig­ure gives us no com­fort.

It sounds too clin­i­cal and al­most harsh and jus­ti­fi­able.

Any death in this small com­mu­ni­ty of ours is a most dis­tress­ing and heart­break­ing oc­cur­rence and no one will like to feel their dear one’s pass­ing was ac­cept­able as we are still be­low the glob­al trend. This calls for much sen­si­tiv­i­ty in pre­sen­ta­tion. Per­son­al­ly, I find the num­ber of deaths very con­cern­ing, of ones dy­ing at home and some en route to the hos­pi­tal.

I was shock­ing to hear of pa­tients dy­ing be­cause they pulled off their oxy­gen masks. Hy­pox­ic pa­tients are con­fused but it is hoped that they are be­ing prop­er­ly cared for med­ical­ly. We need to know how many have re­quired ven­ti­la­tors, and of those, how many died.

I make ref­er­ence to my pre­vi­ous ar­ti­cle again, where I stat­ed the con­cept of Med­ical Con­fi­den­tial­i­ty need­ed to be re­vis­it­ed. As a med­ical pro­fes­sion­al my­self of over 40 years stand­ing, am very much con­scious of this term. By re­peat­ed­ly stat­ing ‘2 were el­der­ly men with co-mor­bidi­ties ‘ etc, tells lit­tle of worth.

By stat­ing the co-mor­bid­i­ty, eg the pa­tient was Di­a­bet­ic or Hy­per­ten­sive can serve as a mes­sage to those Di­a­bet­ics and Hy­per­ten­sives in the pub­lic do­main, to tight­en their con­trol of these con­di­tions, fur­ther lim­it their where­abouts and in­crease their safe­ty pro­to­cols. A Di­a­bet­ic or Hy­per­ten­sive who con­trols their con­di­tion more tight­ly will be bet­ter able to sur­vive the in­fec­tion.

It is be­ing sug­gest­ed that apart from pre­sent­ing the Glob­al, and Lo­cal Epi­demi­ol­o­gy, we must in­clude the Re­gion­al. We must in­volve our­selves in the Re­gion­al COVID-19 epi­demi­o­log­i­cal find­ings as this can on­ly be a fur­ther learn­ing ex­er­cise.

The in­ten­tion here is not to point fin­gers at loop holes but to sup­port good ini­tia­tives as laid out by the MOH while ex­press­ing some con­cerns. COVID-19 is every­one’s busi­ness.

DR C SINANAN-MA­HABIR,

For­mer Se­nior Chest Con­sul­tant/TB Per­son­nel,

Cau­ra Hos­pi­tal


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored