Materials and Methods: Content and face validity of the KAP-ARP were determined by four experts and 20 respondents, respectively. A questionnaire with 36 items, consisting of 16 Knowledge, 9 Attitude, and 11 Perception items, was distributed to 177 respondents. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed for construct validity. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine the reliability of the questionnaire.
Results: EFA constructed 13 Knowledge, 8 Attitude, and 8 Perception items. The final KAP-ARP questionnaire is reliable based on its internal consistency reliability (Knowledge: α = 0.78; Attitude: α = 0.63; Perception: α = 0.70).
Conclusion: A valid and reliable questionnaire that is useful for measuring KAP-ARP among the general population has been developed.
Methods: A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was conducted among 103 pharmacists from 74 different community pharmacies to assess their knowledge about the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reaction reporting by using a pre-validate knowledge questionnaire consisting of 12 questions related to it. The pharmacists' responses were measured at a 3-point Likert scale (Poor=1, Moderate=2, and Good=3) and data was entered in SPSS version 22. The minimum and maximum possible scores for knowledge questionnaires were 12 and 36 respectively. Quantitative data was analyzed by using One Way ANOVA and Paired t-test whereas Chi-square and Fisher exact test were used for qualitative data analysis. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all the analyses.
Results: About 92% of the pharmacist had good knowledge regarding the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reaction reporting with a mean knowledge score of 32.88±3.16. One-way ANOVA determined a significant difference of employment setting (p<0.043) and years of experience (<0.008) with mean knowledge scores of Pharmacists. Pharmacists' knowledge was significantly associated with their years of experience with the Chi-square test.
Conclusion: Pharmacists exhibit good knowledge regarding the use of herbal medicines and its adverse drug reaction reporting. However, with an increasing trend of herbal medicine use and its adverse drug reaction reporting it recalls the empowerment of experienced pharmacists with training programs in this area for better clinical outcomes.
Materials and Methods: The questionnaire was first translated into the Malay language (RDAS-M). In this cross-sectional study, healthy married Malay women in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, were recruited from January to April 2018. Participants were asked to complete the RDAS-M that consists of three domains, that is, dyadic consensus, dyadic satisfaction, and dyadic cohesion with a total of 14 items. The concept, content, and construct validity using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and reliability of the RDAS-M were assessed.
Results: Of the 164 recruited participants, 150 consented to participate. The mean age of the participants was 34.1 years (standard deviation [SD], 9.5 years), ranging from 20 to 57 years. All 14 items were considered comprehensible by more than 95% of the subjects. Based on EFA, total variance extracted was 69.08%, and the original three factors were retained. The Malay version of the RDAS was valid based on factor loadings for dyadic consensus, dyadic satisfaction, and dyadic cohesion, which ranged from 0.64 to 0.80, 0.79 to 0.98, and 0.37 to 0.78, respectively. The internal consistency was good with coefficient α of 0.87 for dyadic consensus, 0.93 for dyadic satisfaction, and 0.78 for dyadic cohesion.
Conclusions: The Malay version of the RDAS is easy to understand, and is a reliable and valid instrument for married women. It is also comparable with the original version of the RDAS in terms of structure and psychometric properties.