Hypoglycemia is an important and harmful complication of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) that often occurs in inpatient or outpatient settings. Hypoglycemia can be divided into two types, i.e. primary hypoglycemia when hypoglycemia is the main diagnosis for admission, whereas secondary hypoglycemia if hypoglycemia occurs during hospitalization. Hypoglycemia during hospitalization or secondary hypoglycemia may arise from various risk factors, such as advanced age, comorbid diseases, type of diabetes, previous history of hypoglycemia, body mass index, hyperglycemia therapy given, as well as other risk factors such as inadequate glucose monitoring, unclear or unreadable physician instructions, limited health personnel, limited facilities, prolonged fasting and incompatibility of nutritional intake and therapy administered. Hypoglycemia can lead to medical and non-medical impacts, such as increased mortality, cardiovascular disorders, cerebrovascular disorders, and increased health care costs and length of stay. The incidence of inpatient hypoglycemia can actually be prevented by controlling modifiable risk factors and also giving education about hypoglycemia to patients and health workers. We performed a literature research in Pubmed, EBSCOhost, and Scopus to review the possible risk factors for inpatient hypoglycemia. Eleven studies were retrieved. We presented the result of these studies as well as a brief overview of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, impact and preventive strategy.

Aims: As the country with the seventh largest number of People with Diabetes (PWD) in the world, the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and the Large Social Scale Restriction (LSSR) policy taken by the Indonesian government to reduce the number of COVID-19 transmissions is estimated to interfere diabetes management and will increase the incidence of diabetes complications. This study aims to determine the difficulties of diabetes management and its impact on diabetes morbidity during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Methods: This study is a cross-sectional study using a national scale web survey. This research was conducted in Indonesia enrolling 1124 PWD aged 18 years or older. Diabetes complications are defined as self-assessed incidence of hypoglycemia, or Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU), or hospital admission experienced by PWD in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic. The correlation between diabetes management difficulties and diabetes-related complications was measured using a modified cox regression test. Results: Diabetes management difficulties were experienced by 69.8% of PWD in Indonesia. The difficulties include attending diabetes consultation 30.1%, access to diabetes medication 12.4%, checking blood glucose levels 9.5%, controlling diet 23.8%, and performing regular exercise 36.5%. Diabetes-related complications occurred in 24.6% of subjects. Those who had diabetes management difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic are prone to have diabetes complications by 1.4 times greater (PR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.09-1.83) than those who did not. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic and LSSR have impact on diabetes management and diabetes-related complications as assessed by PWD in Indonesia.

Aims: The use of non-invasive and easily available assessment tools such as the ADA diabetes risk test is recommended for diabetes screening among general population. This study aims to assess the validity of the ADA diabetes risk test in screening for screening hyperglycemia in Indonesian population. Methods: This cross-sectional study conducted at primary health care in Cibeber sub district at Cilegon city, Banten province, Indonesia. Subjects were aged ≥45 years old without a prior diagnosis of diabetes were recruited consecutively. The risk of hyperglycemia was measured using the ADA Diabetes Risk Test. Random capillary blood glucose (RcBG) with a cut-off value >140 mg/dL used as a comparison. Results: From a total of 134 subjects, 23.13% of subjects (n = 31) had hyperglycemia. The ADA Diabetes Risk Test gave an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60-0.81) with an optimal cut-off of value ≥5. The sensitivity of the ADA diabetes risk test in diagnosing hyperglycemia was 68% with a false-negative rate (FNR) of 32.26%. Meanwhile, at a cut-off value ≥4, the sensitivity of the ADA Diabetes Risk Test was 93% with an FNR of 9.7%. Conclusion: ADA diabetes risk test provides a valuable result as a diabetes screening tool in the Indonesian population, thus promotes intervention strategies for population known to be at risk

BACKGROUND During the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been an increase in workload, as well as greater vigilance and compliance at work. Healthcare workers must perform their duties while facing the fear of COVID-19, which can trigger and/or aggravate stress. This study aimed to obtain the determinant factors of stress among healthcare workers during the pandemic by emphasizing the change in the psychosocial situation at the hospital. METHODS This cross-sectional study was conducted from January to March 2021 using an online questionnaire consisting of personal and occupational questionnaires, as well as the validated stressor and stress questionnaires using validity and reliability tests (Cronbach’s alpha 0.8 and 0.9). For the multivariate analysis, multiple logistic regression was used to identify the determinant factors (p<0.05). Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 20 (IBM Corp., USA). RESULTS Determinant factors of the occurrence of moderate–severe stress were the alteration of stressors including age (aOR = 1.9), working hours (aOR = 1.9), work zone (aOR = 2.7), limited facilities and resources (aOR = 6.2), risk of disease transmission (aOR = 0.3), and personal work demands (aOR = 2.1). CONCLUSIONS In addition to the younger age, the determinant factors of the incidence of moderate–severe stress in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic at the hospitals were work-related conditions. However, they remained controllable to prevent stress among healthcare workers in the peak load work situations such as a pandemic.

Early diagnosis is among the crucial measures to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection. To date, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard for COVID-19 testing, but various factors can affect its performance leading to false negative results. Hereby we present a patient with a high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 and had multiple negative RT-PCR results over 5 days. A 22-year-old woman presented with fever, dry cough, nausea, myalgia, headache, and mild dyspnea. Eleven days before, she was in close contact with her father who had tested positive for COVID-19. RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs were performed on day 8, 9, and 12 of illness which all came back negative even after she started having a worsening dyspnea and showing an increased lung opacity from radiographic findings on day 11 of illness. Interestingly, her rapid antibody test (VivaDiag^™ COVID-19 IgM/IgG rapid test by VivaChek Biotech (HangZhou,China) was positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 Ig M and Ig G. Due to the worsening condition, she was referred to a tertiary hospital where her RT PCR result was positive on day 13 of illness. After 28 days from her first symptom, she was discharged from the hospital with improved symptoms and chest X-ray. As conclusions, in patients with high suspicion of COVID-19, repeat swab tests are mandatory if previous tests were negative. The diagnosis and treatment plan of COVID-19 should not solely be based on RT-PCR, but also consider the patient’s history, symptoms, laboratory result, and radiographic findings.