METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to obtain information from patients with gout under follow-up in primary care and doctors who cared for them. Patients and doctors shared their gout management experiences and views on implementing HLA-B*58:01 screening in primary care. Data were coded and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: 18 patients and 18 doctors from three different healthcare settings (university hospital, public health clinics, private general practitioner clinics) participated. The acceptability to HLA-B*58:01 screening was good among the doctors and patients. We discovered inadequate disclosure of severe side effects of allopurinol by doctors due to concerns about medication refusal by patients, which could potentially be improved by introducing HLA-B*58:01 testing. Barriers to implementation included out-of-pocket costs for patients, the cost-effectiveness of this implementation, lack of established alternative treatment pathway besides allopurinol, counselling burden and concern about genetic data security. Our participants preferred targeted screening for high-risk populations instead of universal screening.
CONCLUSION: Implementing HLA-B*58:01 testing in primary care is potentially feasible if a cost-effective, targeted screening policy on high-risk groups can be developed. A clear treatment pathway for patients who test positive should be made available.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study involving 233 patients with high cardiovascular risk was conducted at a primary care clinic in Malaysia. Participants used a digital information diary tool to record online health information they encountered for 2 months and completed a questionnaire about statin necessity, concerns and adherence at the end of the observation period. Data were analysed using structural equation modelling.
RESULTS: The results showed that 55.8% (130 of 233 patients) encountered online health information. Patients who actively sought online health information (91 of 233 patients) had higher concerns about statin use (β = 0.323, p = 0.023). Participants with higher concern about statin use were also more likely to be non-adherent (β = -0.337, p
METHODS: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with qualitative interviews was conducted. Each primary care doctor was considered a cluster and randomized to either the control (usual practice) or intervention (DeSSBack) group. Patient outcomes including Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a 10-point pain rating scale were measured at baseline and 2-month postintervention. The doctors in the intervention group were interviewed to explore feasibility and acceptability of using DeSSBack.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with nonspecific LBP participated in this study (intervention n = 23; control n = 13). Fidelity was poor among patients but good among doctors. The RMDQ and anxiety score had medium effect sizes of 0.718 and 0.480, respectively. The effect sizes for pain score (0.070) and depression score were small (0.087). There was appreciable acceptability and satisfaction with use of DeSSBack, as it was helpful in facilitating thorough and standardized management, providing appropriate treatment plans based on risk stratification, improving consultation time, empowering patient-centred care, and easy to use.
CONCLUSIONS: A future cRCT to evaluate the effectiveness of DeSSBack is feasible to be conducted in a primary care setting with minor modifications. DeSSBack was found useful by doctors and can be improved to enhance efficiency.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol of the cluster randomized controlled trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04959669).
DESIGN: This was a qualitative study using semi-structured in-depth interviews. An interpretive description approach with thematic analysis was used for data analysis.
SETTING: An urban primary care clinic in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18 years and above who had high cardiovascular risk and sought OHI on statins were recruited.
RESULTS: A total of 20 participants were interviewed. The age of the participants ranged from 38 to 74 years. Twelve (60%) participants took statins for primary cardiovascular disease prevention. The duration of statin use ranged from 2 weeks to 30 years. Six themes emerged from the data analysis: (i) seeking OHI throughout the disease trajectory, (ii) active and passive approaches to seeking OHI, (iii) types of OHI, (iv) views about statin-related OHI, (v) influence of OHI on patients' health decisions, and (vi) patient-doctor communication about OHI.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights the changing information needs throughout patient journeys, suggesting the opportunity to provide needs-oriented OHI to patients. Unintentional passive exposure to OHI appears to have an influence on patients' adherence to statins. The quality of patient-doctor communication in relation to OHI-seeking behaviour remains a critical factor in patient decision-making.
METHODS: This qualitative study used vignettes and think-aloud methods. We recruited patients from a primary care clinic who were at least 18 years old, had high cardiovascular risk and had previously sought OHI. Participants were given two statin-related vignettes: Vignette 1 (low-quality information) and Vignette 2 (high-quality information). Participants voiced their thoughts aloud when reading the vignettes and determined the trust level for each vignette using a 5-point Likert scale. This was followed by a semi-structured interview which was audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were coded and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 20 participants were recruited, with age ranging from 38-74 years. Among all the high cardiovascular-risk participants, eight had pre-existing cardiovascular diseases. For Vignette 1 (low-quality information), five participants trusted it while nine participants were unsure of their trust. 17 participants (85%) trusted Vignette 2 (high-quality information). Five themes emerged from the analysis of how patients evaluated OHI: (1) logical content, (2) neutral stance and tone of OHI content, (3) credibility of the information source, (4) consistent with prior knowledge and experience, and (5) corroboration with information from other sources.
CONCLUSION: Patients with high cardiovascular risks focused on the content, source credibility and information consistency when evaluating and determining their trust in statin-related OHI. Doctors should adopt a more personalised approach when discussing statin-related online misinformation with patients by considering their prior knowledge, beliefs and experience of statin use.
METHODS: We used a mixed-method design to evaluate how participants used the smartphone diary tool and their perspectives on usability. Participants were high cardiovascular-risk patients recruited from a primary care clinic and used the tool for a week. We measured usability with the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire and interviewed participants to explore utility and usability issues.
RESULTS: The information diary was available in three languages and tested with 24 participants. The mean SUS score was 69.8 ± 12.9. Five themes related to utility were: IDP functions as a health information diary; supporting discussion of health information with doctors; wanting a feedback function about credible information; increasing awareness of the need to appraise information; and wanting to compare levels of trust with other participants or experts. Four themes related to usability were: ease of learning and use; confusion about selecting the category of information source; capturing offline information by uploading photos; and recording their level of trust.
CONCLUSION: We found that the smartphone diary can be used as a research instrument to record relevant examples of information exposure. It potentially modifies how people seek and appraise topic-specific health information.
METHODS: This 1-month cross-sectional study was conducted at an urban hospital-based primary care clinic in Malaysia. Patients with T2DM were recruited using systematic random sampling. Participants answered a self-administered questionnaire adapted from the Diabetes Symptom Checklist-Revised, which evaluated the sociodemographic characteristics, burden of diabetes mellitus-related symptoms in the past month and post-consultation feedback about symptoms. Data were analysed using SPSS.
RESULTS: Four hundred eighteen participants were included, yielding a response rate of 97.7%. Hyperglycaemia was the most prevalent symptom, with 48.1% of the participants reporting a frequent need to empty their bladder. Most participants experienced a low symptom burden, so 56.7% did not report their symptoms to their doctors. The participants who reported their symptoms had a higher symptom burden. Among them, 97.5% indicated that their doctors addressed their symptoms. Approximately 78% reported satisfaction and good coping skills when their symptoms were addressed.
CONCLUSION: Hyperglycaemia was the most prevalent diabetes mellitus-related symptom among the patients with T2DM. The symptom burden was generally low, so most patients did not report their symptoms to their doctors. Those who reported their symptoms had a higher symptom burden. Further studies must explore why patients do not report their symptoms and how doctors address patients' symptoms.
METHOD: This was a qualitative study using brief, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews amongst delegates at a 3-day Asia Pacific regional academic primary care conference in Singapore. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and their contents analysed thematically.
RESULTS: Eighty-nine interviews were analysed. Respondents were mainly early career researchers (58%), and a third were presenting (poster or oral) at the conference. Many positive attributes of posters were identified. For the viewers, these included the ability to gain a rapid overview of research activity (for "benchmarking", "updating", and "inspiration"); the ability to choose who to engage with and when, in contrast to the tightly scheduled oral sessions; and opportunity to discuss content in a leisurely and detailed fashion with the presenter. Presenters considered posters "less threatening" than oral presentations and valued posters for the networking opportunities they created. However, posters were reported to be more demanding on the skills of précis and their preparation was considered arduous and more expensive than an oral presentation. Posters were also perceived to have lower academic status and dominate the presenter's time at the conference, reducing the opportunities for them to see the work of others. Suggestions for incorporating technologies to enhance the impact of posters included QR codes to access more detailed information, pre-recorded presentations, and online interactive clarification sessions with poster authors.
CONCLUSION: Posters are perceived as a valuable mode of presentation at scientific conferences by presenters and viewers. Their unique strengths challenge the perception that posters are somehow inferior to oral presentations, suggesting a need for their advantages to be promoted by researchers and conference organisers. The incorporation of technology within the traditional display may enhance poster utility. Given the time and money spent on academic conferences there is an urgent need to evaluate the different styles of presentation used at conferences and how they differ in their ability to impact on medical science knowledge and evidence-based clinical practice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01657-z.
METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study involving 12 patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer, 16 healthcare professionals and 5 policymakers from surgical and oncology departments at public healthcare centres in Malaysia. Semi-structured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the thematic approach. Nvivo software was used to manage and analyse the data.
RESULTS: Five main themes emerged from the study: healthcare provider-patient communication, workforce availability, cultural and belief systems, goals of care and paternalism versus autonomy. Other strategies proposed to overcome barriers to implementing shared decision-making were training of healthcare professionals and empowering nurses to manage patients' psychosocial issues.
CONCLUSION: This study found that practising shared decision-making in the public health sector remains challenging when managing patients with metastatic breast cancer. The utilization of decision-making tools, patient empowerment and healthcare provider training may help address the system and healthcare provider-patient barriers identified in this study.
PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were involved in the study design, recruitment and analysis.
METHODS: The search was performed based on internet search and three main databases: PubMed, SCOPUS and EBSCO. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation guideline was used to report this work.
RESULTS: Of 34 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 242 essential original constructs were collated, and 7 concepts were derived. Digital content showed the highest percentage of collated original constructs (27%, n = 65) followed by accessibility (24%, n = 56), comprehension engagement (18%, n = 43), autonomy (14%, n = 34), confidentiality (11%, n = 25), language (5%, n = 13), and parental consent (1%, n = 2). Twenty-five new items were synthesized for eConsent criteria which may provide guidance for ethical review of research involving eConsent.
CONCLUSION: The current study adds significant value to the corpus of knowledge in research ethics by providing ethical criteria on electronic informed consent based on evidence-based data. The new synthesized items in the criteria can be readily used as an initial guide by the IRB/REC members during a review process on electronic informed consent and useful to the future preparation of a checklist.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of online health information-seeking and its associated factors among patients in primary care in Malaysia. We also examined the reasons for, and the sources of, online health information-seeking, patients' level of trust in the information found and what the information was used for.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was conducted on patients who attended a primary care clinic. The questionnaire included the use of the internet to seek health information, sources and types of health information, eHealth literacy, patients' trust in online information, and how patients appraise and use online health information.
RESULTS: Out of 381 patients in this study, 54.7% (n = 208) used the internet to search for health information. Patients mainly sought information via Google (96.2%) and the most common websites that they visited were Wikipedia (45.2%) and MyHEALTH (37.5%). Higher levels of education, longer duration of internet use, and higher eHealth literacy were significantly associated with online HISB. Patients' trust in websites (45.6%) and social media (20.7%) was low when compared to trust in healthcare professionals (87.9%). Only 12.9% (n = 22) of patients had discussed online health information with their doctors.
CONCLUSION: Online HISB was common among primary care patients; however, their eHealth literacy was low, with suboptimal appraisal skills to evaluate the accuracy of online health information.
METHODS: This review included both qualitative and quantitative studies. Studies were obtained by searching five databases, contacting field experts and performing backward reference searches. The best-fit meta-synthesis approach was used during data synthesis, where extracted data were fitted into the social-ecological model. Sub-analyses were conducted to identify the commonly reported factors and their level of statistical significance.
RESULTS: Twenty studies were selected for meta-synthesis. Eighteen factors influencing healthcare seeking in dengue were identified and categorised under four domains: individual (11 factors), interpersonal (one factor), organisational (four factors) and community (two factors). The most reported factors were knowledge of dengue, access to healthcare, quality of health service and resource availability. Overall, more barriers to dengue health seeking than facilitators were found. History of dengue infection and having knowledge of dengue were found to be ambiguous as they both facilitated and hindered dengue healthcare seeking. Contrary to common belief, women were less likely to seek help for dengue than men.
CONCLUSIONS: The factors affecting dengue healthcare-seeking behaviour are diverse, can be ambiguous and are found across multiple social-ecological levels. Understanding these complexities is essential for the development of effective interventions to improve dengue healthcare-seeking behaviour.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the level of eHealth literacy in patients attending a primary care clinic in Malaysia and its associated factors.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was conducted in an urban primary care clinic. We used a systematic random sampling method to select patients aged 18 years and above who attended the clinic. The eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS) was used to measure eHealth literacy.
RESULTS: A total of 381 participants were included. The mean eHEALS was 24.4 ± 7.6. The eHEALS statements related to skills in appraising OHI were scored lower than statements related to looking for online resources. Higher education level of attending upper secondary school (AOR 2.53, 95% CI 1.05-6.11), tertiary education (AOR 4.05, 95% CI 1.60-10.25), higher monthly household income of >US$470 (AOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.07-3.56), and those who had sought OHI in the past month (AOR 1.95, 95% CI 1.13-3.36) were associated with a higher eHealth literacy level.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found a low eHealth literacy level among primary care patients in Malaysia. While the patients were confident in searching for OHI, they lacked skills in appraising them. Our findings inform the interventions for improving eHealth literacy in LMICs, especially educating the public about OHI appraisal.