METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted to observe the effect of WAAP on asthma control and quality of life using the Asthma Control Questionnaire and Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ) at baseline and after 3 months. A repeated measure analysis of variance was used to analyze the mean score difference between the two groups.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in mean score for asthma control at baseline between groups (F[degree of freedom (df)]=1.17 [1, 119], P=0.282). However, at 3 months, a significant difference in mean scores between groups was observed (F[df]=7.32 [1, 119], P=0.008). The mean±standard deviation (SD) scores in the intervention and control groups were 0.96±0.53 and 1.21±0.49, respectively. For the analysis of the PAQLQ, no significant difference was observed in the mean score for the quality of life baseline in both groups. There were significant mean score changes for the quality of life (F[df]=10.9 [1, 119], P=0.001) at 3 months follow-up, where those in the intervention group scored a mean±SD score of 6.19±0.45, and those in the control group scored 5.94±0.38. A time-group interaction analysis using repeated-measures analysis of variance showed significant differences in mean score changes (F[df]=5.03 [1, 116], P=0.027) and (F[df]=11.55 [1, 116], P=0.001) where a lower mean score was observed in the intervention group, indicating better asthma control and quality of life, respectively. A significant (P<0.001) negative Pearson correlation between asthma control and quality of life (-0.65) indicated a moderate correlation.
CONCLUSION: WAAP, along with standard asthma treatment, improves asthma care.
METHODS: An interventional study was conducted in 121 antenatal women selected through systematic random sampling between June and December 2010. Baseline knowledge of, attitude towards, and practice of pelvic floor muscle exercise were assessed using self-administered validated questionnaires at first visit and at 2 months postpartum. All participants attended two exercise education classes on their next two visits before delivery. A paired ttest and multivariate analysis were used for data evaluation.
RESULTS: The mean pre-intervention scores for knowledge, attitudes, and practice were 24.98, 24.25, and 3.51, respectively, with statistically significant mean score increments after intervention (P<0.001). The mean differences were 4.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.86-5.49), 3.77 (95% CI, 3.05-4.50) and 3.45 (95% CI, 2.90-4.00) for knowledge, attitudes, and practice, respectively. Lack of baseline information on pelvic floor muscle exercise was significantly associated with practice change following an educational class.
CONCLUSION: Education is effective in improving knowledge of, attitude towards, and practice of pelvic floor muscle exercise. There is a need for greater effort to increase exercise awareness in our community, especially during antenatal class.
METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted from December 2014 to April 2015. The home blood pressure monitoring group used an automatic blood pressure device along with standard hypertension outpatient care. Patients were seen at baseline and after 2 months. Medication adherence was measured using a novel validated Medication Adherence Scale (MAS) questionnaire. Office blood pressure and MAS were recorded at both visits. The primary outcomes included evaluation of mean office blood pressure and MAS within groups and between groups at baseline and after 2 months.
RESULTS: Mean changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and MAS differed significantly within groups. The home blood pressure monitoring group showed greater mean changes (SBP 17.6 mm Hg, DBP 9.5 mm Hg, MAS 1.5 vs. SBP 14.3 mm Hg, DBP 6.4 mm Hg, MAS 1.3), while between group comparisons showed no significant differences across all variables. The adjusted mean difference for mean SBP was 4.74 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.65 to 10.13 mm Hg; P=0.084), mean DBP was 1.41 (95% CI, -2.01 to 4.82 mm Hg; P=0.415), and mean MAS was 0.05 (95% CI, -0.29 to 0.40 mm Hg; P=0.768).
CONCLUSION: Short-term home blood pressure monitoring significantly reduced office blood pressure and improved medication adherence, albeit similarly to standard care.
METHODOLOGY: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PubMed (1985-January 2022) and trial registries for relevant randomised clinical trials were used. Relevant and published randomised clinical trials were reviewed and evaluated. The primary outcomes were anthropometry measurements, which were weight, waist circumference, body mass index (BMI), and body fat percentages. The secondary outcomes were changes in quality of life, psychological impact, lipid profile measurement, presence of adverse events, and changes in blood pressure and blood glucose. We assessed the data for risk of bias, heterogeneity, sensitivity, reporting bias, and quality of evidence.
RESULTS: 15 studies are included, involving 1161 participants. The analysis performed is based on three comparisons. For the first comparison between yoga and control, yoga reduces the waist circumference (MD -0.84, 95% CI [-5.12 to 3.44]), while there is no difference in body weight, BMI, or body fat percentages. In the second comparison between yoga and calorie restriction, yoga reduces body weight (MD -3.47, 95% CI [-6.20 to -0.74]), while there is no difference in waist circumference, BMI, or body fat percentage. In the third comparison between yoga and exercise, yoga reduces the body weight (MD -7.58, 95% CI [-11.51 to -3.65]), while there is no difference in waist circumference or BMI. For the secondary outcomes, yoga intervention reduces total cholesterol (MD -17.12, 95% CI [-32.24 to -2.00]) and triglycerides (MD -21.75, 95% CI [-38.77 to -4.73]) compared to the control group, but there is no difference compared to the calorie restriction and exercise group. There is no difference in the rest of the outcomes, which are LDL, HDL, quality of life, psychological impact, adverse events, blood pressure, and blood glucose. However, findings are not robust due to a high risk of bias and low-quality evidence.
CONCLUSION: From our review, there were methodological drawbacks and very low to moderate quality of evidence across all comparisons, and hence, it is inconclusive to say that yoga can significantly improve anthropometric parameters. More well-designed trials are needed to confirm and support the beneficial effects of yoga.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 128 caregivers of children with ASD in Kota Bharu, Kelantan from May to August 2020, using convenience sampling. Validated questionnaires were used to assess the knowledge and attitudes toward children with ASD. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 24. Descriptive statistics and simple and multiple logistic regression analyses were then performed.
RESULTS: The response rate was 100%. The proportion of good knowledge and attitudes toward children with ASD among caregivers was 85.1% and 88.3%, respectively. Factors significantly associated with good knowledge were being female (OR (95% CI) 2.79 [0.99-7.90]) and ASD children being non-first-born children (OR (95% CI) 0.41 [0.15-1.12]). Factors significantly associated with good attitudes were age of 30 years and older (OR (95% CI) 0.13 [0.03-0.62]) and caregiver having other children with other types of learning difficulties (OR (95% CI) 0.15 [0.04, 0.52]).
CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of caregivers with good knowledge of ASD and good attitudes toward children with ASD was high. The caregiver's age and sex, the position of the ASD child among the siblings, and the presence of other types of learning disorders in the family need to be considered when managing children with ASD.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 295 medical doctors and staff nurses from June to December 2015. Simple random sampling was applied. The data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire and analyzed using IBM SPSS ver. 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed.
RESULTS: The prevalence of unsuccessful exclusive breastfeeding among the study participants was 58.3%. Mothers who preferred formula milk (odds ratio [OR], 4.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-13.31) delivered via lower segment cesarean section (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.07-4.98) and produced inadequate breast milk (OR, 4.06; 95% CI, 2.40- 6.89) were significantly associated with unsuccessful exclusive breastfeeding.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of unsuccessful exclusive breastfeeding among the study participants was high. Maternal characteristics such as preference towards formula milk, mode of delivery and adequacy of breast milk must be assessed to prevent unsuccessful exclusive breastfeeding among healthcare providers.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among the female staff aged 50 years old and above in Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia. The data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire and the Viarad online system. The questionnaires include sociodemographic information, medical factors, knowledge regarding breast cancer and health beliefs about breast cancer. The Viarad online system was used to trace data of mammogram findings for those who underwent mammogram screening.
RESULTS: Among 260 participants, the prevalence of mammogram screening uptake was only 51.9%. By using statistical analysis simple logistic regression and multiple logistic regression, we found that the most significant associated factors were age, clinical breast examination (CBE), level of knowledge and physician recommendation. The mammogram screening showed that most of the breast cancer findings in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category 2 were at a rate of approximately 35.6%.
CONCLUSION: This study showed the prevalence of mammogram screening uptake among the female staff was 51.9% although the service is free, readily available and accessible. The older age group, CBE, physician recommendation and knowledge about breast cancer were the main associated factors for mammogram screening uptake in the female staff in this hospital. An education programme aimed at improving the knowledge and role of a physician in promoting mammogram screening among staff should be established.
METHODOLOGY: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2021, Issue 3 of 12), MEDLINE databases (1980 to December week 1, 2020), and trial registries for relevant randomized clinical trials were used. All randomized clinical trials were reviewed and evaluated. Random effects models were used to estimate the dichotomous outcomes and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Data for risk of bias, heterogeneity, sensitivity, reporting bias and quality of evidence were assessed.
RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials with 1949 premenopausal women from 323 locations were included. Elagolix improved menstrual blood loss of less than 80 ml (RR 4.81, 95% CI 2.45 to 9.45; four trials, 869 participants; moderate quality evidence) or more than 50% reduction from baseline (RR 4.87, 95% CI 2.55 to 9.31; four trials, 869 participants; moderate quality evidence) compared to placebo. There was no difference in menstrual blood loss of less than 80 ml (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.16; five trials, 1365 participants; moderate quality evidence) or more than 50% reduction from baseline between the elagolix (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.15; five trials, 1365 participants; high quality evidence) and elagolix with estradiol/norethindrone acetate. In both comparisons, elagolix has reduced the mean percentage change in uterine and fibroid volume, improved symptoms, and health-related quality of life. More patients had hot flush, and bone mineral density loss in the elagolix treatment compared to both placebo and elagolix with estradiol/norethindrone acetate.
CONCLUSIONS: Elagolix appeared to be effective in reducing heavy menstrual bleeding caused by uterine fibroid and combination with estradiol/norethindrone acetate was able to alleviate the hypoestrogenism side effects in premenopausal women. Review registration PROSPERO CDR 42021233898.