Search

This study investigated how mathematics teachers at Ozamiz City School of Arts and Trades perceived the implementation of limited face-to-face classes. The researcher purposively identified ten (10) secondary mathematics teachers, parents, and students who have participated in the implementation of limited face-to-face classes. A semi-structured interview was utilized to interview the Mathematics teachers, parents, and students at OCSAT. All online and offline interviews were recorded and verified because the researcher sought to capture the data precisely and comprehensively. Using Merriam Case Study Model, particularly a three-component triangulation, the outcome is supported by the feedback from parents and students to have an authenticity of results from the main respondents. This model helps identify the perceptions, challenges encountered, coping strategies, and suggestions and recommendations by the mathematics teachers in implementing limited face-to-face classes. Results showed that mathematics teachers acquire a sense of positivity because, with almost two (2) years of modular distance learning, teachers become excited to teach again. However, disadvantages occur using this modality that make teachers drained physically and mentally. With inconsistent findings using dissonance theory, the need to resume full in-person instruction was concluded.

Introduction: Remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a phenomenon in which the induction of shortened periods of ischemia prior to surgical procedures within a distant tissue preserves other tissues or organs of concern, such as the liver or kidney in transplant surgery, in the event of prolonged ischemic insults. The authors aim to evaluate the effectiveness of RIPC in patients undergoing transplant surgery, specifically kidney and liver transplants., Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched until 19 December 2023 for trials evaluating RIPC in patients undergoing transplant surgery. A total of 9364 search articles were obtained, which yielded 10 eligible studies. Data analysis was done using RevMan 5.4 software. The risk of bias was done using Cochrane risk of bias tool., Results and Discussion: For graft rejection, the study observed a relative risk of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.49-1.98, P =0.97) from 5 trials, indicating no significant effect of RIPC on graft survival in both kidney and liver transplants. The length of hospital stay also showed no significant decrease for those undergoing RIPC, with mean difference (MD) of -0.58 (95% CI, -1.38 to 0.23, P =0.16). GFR at 1-year post-kidney transplant did not significantly change in the RIPC group compared to controls, as evidenced by an MD of -0.13 (95% CI, -3.79 to 3.54, P =0.95). These results collectively suggest that RIPC may not be effective in reducing patient, or graft, outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors involved in this review certify that they have no conflict of interest, affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest.Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)