Background and Objectives: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused significant disruption to established medical care systems globally. Thus, this study was aimed to compare the admission and outcome variables such as number of patient and its severity, acute recanalisation therapy given pre-post COVID-19 at a primary stroke centre located in Malaysia. Methods: This cross-sectional hospital-based study included adult ischaemic stroke patients. Variables of the study included the number of ischaemic stroke patients, the proportions of recanalisation therapies, stroke severity during admission based on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, functional outcome at discharge based on the modified Rankin Scale, and relevant workflow metrics. We compared the outcome between two six-month periods, namely the pre-COVID-19 period (March 2019 to September 2019) and the COVID-19 period (March 2020 to September 2020). Results: There were 131 and 156 patients, respectively, from the pre-COVID-19 period and the COVID-19 period. The median door-to-scan time and the median door-to-reperfusion time were both significantly shorter in the COVID-19 period (24.5 min versus 12.0 min, p = 0.047) and (93.5 min versus 60.0 min, p = 0.015), respectively. There were also significantly more patients who received intravenous thrombolysis (7.6% versus 17.3%, p = 0.015) and mechanical thrombectomy (0.8% versus 6.4%, p = 0.013) in the COVID-19 period, respectively. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic may not have caused disruptions of acute stroke care in our primary stroke centre. Our data indicated that the number of ischaemic stroke events remained stable, with a significant increase of recanalisation therapies and better in-hospital workflow metrics during the COVID-19 pandemic period. However, we would like to highlight that the burden of COVID-19 cases in the study area was very low. Therefore, the study may not have captured the true burden (and relevant delays in stroke patient management) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The effect of the pandemic crisis is ongoing and both pre-hospital and in-hospital care systems must continue to provide optimal, highly time-dependent stroke care services.
Diabetes causes significant disabilities, reduced quality of life and mortality that imposes huge economic burden on societies and governments worldwide. Malaysia suffers a high diabetes burden in Asia, but the magnitude of healthcare expenditures documented to aid national health policy decision-making is limited. This systematic review aimed to document the economic burden of diabetes in Malaysia, and identify the factors associated with cost burden and the methods used to evaluate costs. Studies conducted between 2000 and 2019 were retrieved using three international databases (PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE) and one local database (MyCite), as well as manual searches. Peer reviewed research articles in English and Malay on economic evaluations of adult type 2 diabetes conducted in Malaysia were included. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020151857), reported according to PRISMA and used a quality checklist adapted for cost of illness studies. Data were extracted using a data extraction sheet that included study characteristics, total costs, different costing methods and a scoring system to assess the quality of studies reviewed. The review identified twelve eligible studies that conducted cost evaluations of type 2 diabetes in Malaysia. Variation exists in the costs and methods used in these studies. For direct costs, four studies evaluated costs related to complications and drugs, and two studies were related to outpatient and inpatient costs each. Indirect and intangible costs were estimated in one study. Four studies estimated capital and recurrent costs. The estimated total annual cost of diabetes in Malaysia was approximately USD 600 million. Age, type of hospitals or health provider, length of inpatient stay and frequency of outpatient visits were significantly associated with costs. The most frequent epidemiological approach employed was prevalence-based (n = 10), while cost analysis was the most common costing approach used. The current review offers the first documented evidence on cost estimates of diabetes in Malaysia.