METHODS AND FINDINGS: This mixed method (qualitative and quantitative) study was conducted from 2018 to 2019 using a self-administered questionnaire among Muslim medical doctors from 2 main medical associations with a large number of Muslim members from all over Malaysia who attended their annual conference. For those doctors who did not attend the conference, the questionnaire was posted to them. Association A had 510 members, 64 male Muslim doctors and 333 female Muslim doctors. Association B only had Muslim doctors; 3,088 were female, and 1,323 were male. In total, 894 questionnaires were distributed either by hand or by post, and 366 completed questionnaires were received back. For the qualitative part of the study, a snowball sampling method was used, and 24 in-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured questionnaire, until data reached saturation. Quantitative data were analysed using SPSS version 18 (IBM, Armonk, NY). A chi-squared test and binary logistic regression were performed. The qualitative data were transcribed manually, organized, coded, and recoded using NVivo version 12. The clustered codes were elicited as common themes. Most of the respondents were women, had medical degrees from Malaysia, and had a postgraduate degree in Family Medicine. The median age was 42. Most were working with the Ministry of Health (MoH) Malaysia, and in a clinic located in an urban location. The prevalence of Muslim doctors practising FGC was 20.5% (95% CI 16.6-24.9). The main reason cited for practising FGC was religious obligation. Qualitative findings too showed that religion was a strong motivating factor for the practice and its continuation, besides culture and harm reduction. Although most Muslim doctors performed type IV FGC, there were a substantial number performing type I. Respondents who were women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.4, 95% CI 1.9-10.0. P ≤ 0.001), who owned a clinic (aOR 30.7, 95% CI 12.0-78.4. P ≤ 0.001) or jointly owned a clinic (aOR 7.61, 95% CI 3.2-18.1. P ≤ 0.001), who thought that FGC was legal in Malaysia (aOR 2.09, 95% CI 1.02-4.3. P = 0.04), and who were encouraged in religion (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 3.2-18.1. P = 0.036) and thought that FGC should continue (aOR 3.54, 95% CI 1.25-10.04. P = 0.017) were more likely to practice FGC. The main limitations of the study were the small sample size and low response rate.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that many of the Muslim doctors were unaware of the legal and international stand against FGC, and many wanted the practice to continue. It is a concern that type IV FGC carried out by traditional midwives may be supplanted and exacerbated by type I FGC performed by doctors, calling for strong and urgent action by the Malaysian medical authorities.
Materials and Methods: Sixty-nine men underwent mpMRI of the prostate followed by TRUS biopsy. In addition to 12-core biopsy, CFB was performed on abnormal lesions detected on MRI.
Results: Abnormal lesions were identified in 98.6% of the patients, and 59.4% had the highest PI-RADS score of 3 or more. With the use of PI-RADS 3 as cutoff, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRI for the detection of PCa were 91.7%, 57.8%, 53.7%, and 92.8%, respectively. With the use of PI-RADS 4 as cutoff, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of mpMRI were 66.7%, 91.1%, 80%, and 83.7%, respectively. Systematic biopsy detected more PCa compared to CFB (29% vs. 26.1%), but CFB detected more significant (Gleason grade ≥7) PCa (17.4% vs. 14.5%) (P < 0.01). CFB cores have a higher PCa detection rate as compared to systematic cores (P < 0.01).
Conclusions: mpMRI has a good predictive ability for PCa. CFB is superior to systematic biopsy in the detection of the significant PCa.
Objective: To assess the impact of pharmacist-supervised intervention on HRQoL of newly diagnosed diabetics using an Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life (ADDQoL) questionnaire.
Materials and Methods: A pre-post comparison study was conducted among the control group (CG), test 1 group (T1G) and test 2 group (T2G) patients with three treatment arms to explore the impact of pharmacist-supervised intervention on HRQoL of newly diagnosed diabetics for 18 months. Patients' HRQoL scores were determined using ADDQoL questionnaire at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12-months. T1G patients received pharmacist's intervention whereas T2G patients received diabetic kit demonstration in addition to pharmacist's intervention. CG patients were deprived of pharmacist intervention and diabetic kit demonstration, and only received care from attending physician/nurses. Non-parametric tests were used to find the differences in an average weighted impact scores (AWIS) among the groups before and after the intervention at P ≤ 0.05.
Results: Friedman test identified significant (P < 0.001) improvement in AWIS among the test groups' patients. Differences in scores were significant between T1G and T2G at 6-months (P = 0.033), 9-months (P < 0.001) and 12-months (P < 0.001); between CG and T1G at 12-months (P < 0.001) and between CG and T2G at 9-months (P < 0.001) and 12-months (P < 0.0010) on Mann.Whitney U test.
Conclusion: Pharmacist's intervention improved AWIS of test groups' diabetics. Diabetic kit demonstration strengthened the disease understanding and selfcare skills of T2G patients. Disease and self-care awareness among diabetics should be increased in Nepali healthcare system by involving pharmacists for better patient's related outcomes.
Methods: An extensive literature review was done using Google-Scholar and PubMed to find out scales that utilized to assess quality of life among DM patients. Four relevant scales, three diabetes specific and one general, were selected. The selected scales were carefully evaluated to find out domains that are commonly used to assess quality of life and then the items within the selected domains were reviewed to choose relevant and comprehensive items for Iraqi type 2 DM patients. Ten items were selected to formulate the quality of life scale for Iraqi DM patients (QOLSID). The content validity of QOLSID was established via an expert panel. For concurrent validity QOLSID was compared to glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1C). For psychometric evaluation, a cross sectional study for 103 type 2 DM patients was conducted at the National Diabetes Center, Iraq. Test-retest reliability was measured by re-administering QOLSID to 20 patients 2-4 weeks later.
Results: The internal consistency of the QOLSID was 0.727. All items had a corrected total-item correlation above 0.2. There was a negative significant correlation between QOLSID score and the HbA1C level (-0.518, P = 0.000). A significant positive correlation was obtained after re-testing (0.967, P = 0.000).
Conclusion: The QOLSID is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used for assessing quality of life among Iraqi type 2 DM patients.