METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted among patients with MetS attending a university primary care clinic in Selangor, Malaysia. The usability score was measured using a previously translated and validated EMPOWER-SUSTAIN Usability Questionnaire (E-SUQ) with a score of > 68 indicating good usability. Multiple logistic regressions determined the factors associated with its usability.
RESULTS: A total of 391 patients participated in this study. More than half (61.4%) had a good usability score of > 68, with a mean (± SD) usability score of 72.8 (± 16.1). Participants with high education levels [secondary education (AOR 2.46, 95% CI 1.04, 5.83) and tertiary education (AOR 2.49, 95% CI 1.04, 5.96)], those who used the booklet at home weekly (AOR 2.94, 95% CI 1.63, 5.33) or daily (AOR 2.73, 95% CI 1.09, 6.85), and those who had social support to use the booklet (AOR 1.64, 95% CI 1.02, 2.64) were significantly associated with good usability of the booklet.
CONCLUSIONS: The usability of the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN Global Cardiovascular Risks Self-Management Booklet© was good among patients with MetS in this primary care clinic, which supports its widespread use as a patient empowerment tool. The findings of this study also suggest that it is vital to encourage daily or weekly use of this booklet at home, with the support of family members. The focus should also be given to those with lower education to improve the usability of this booklet for this group of patients.
CASE SUMMARY: This is the case of a 54-year-old Malay woman with genetically confirmed FH complicated by premature coronary artery disease (PCAD). She was clinically diagnosed in primary care at 52 years old, fulfilling the Simon Broome Criteria (possible FH), Dutch Lipid Clinic Criteria (score of 8: probable FH), and Familial Hypercholesterolaemia Case Ascertainment Tool (relative risk score of 9.51). Subsequently, she was confirmed to have a heterozygous LDLR c.190+4A>T intron 2 pathogenic variant at the age of 53 years. She was known to have hypercholesterolaemia and was treated with statin since the age of 25. However, the lipid-lowering agent was not intensified to achieve the recommended treatment target. The delayed FH diagnosis has caused this patient to have PCAD and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at the age of 29 years and a second PCI at the age of 49 years. She also has a very strong family history of hypercholesterolaemia and PCAD, where seven out of eight of her siblings were affected. Despite this, FH was not diagnosed early, and cascade screening of family members was not conducted, resulting in a missed opportunity to prevent PCAD.
DISCUSSION: Familial hypercholesterolaemia can be clinically diagnosed in primary care to identify those who may require genetic testing. Multidisciplinary care focuses on improving identification, cascade screening, and management of FH, which is vital to improving prognosis and ultimately preventing PCAD.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This study was based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes) statement guidelines for a systematic review of the academic databases Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, EBSCOhost (SportDiscus), and Google Scholar. The PEDro scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included publications, which ranged from moderate to high quality. The systematic review protocol was registered on inplasy.com (INPLASY202380049).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Out of 249 studies identified, 93 articles were evaluated as eligible, and after the screening, 18 studies were finally included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis results showed a significant enhancement on vertical jump height in the BFRT group compared to the control group (SMD=1.39, 95% CI=0.30-2.49, P=0.01). BFRT was able to significantly increase maximal oxygen uptake (SMD=1.65, 95% CI=0.56-2.74, P<0.01). While no significant improvement in sprint time was observed (SMD= -0.18, 95% CI=-1.18-0.82, P=0.115).
CONCLUSIONS: The finding suggests that BFRT is beneficial to athletes as this training method can be effective in enhancing physical and technical performance in athletes. Nevertheless, further analysis needs to be conducted to fully determine the effectiveness of the moderators of the intervention on sports performance.
METHODOLOGY: This was a cross-sectional study, conducted among patients aged ≥ 18 years with cardiovascular risk factors attending a university primary care clinic. Patients were given the app to use for at least three months. Those who fulfilled the eligibility criteria were recruited. Data gathered were on sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, self-management support by doctors, utilisation of the app at home and social support in using the app. The previously translated and validated Malay version of the mHealth App Usability Questionnaire was used to measure usability. The mean usability score was calculated and linear regressions analysis was conducted to determine the factors associated with the usability of the app.
RESULTS: A total of 247 patients with at least one cardiovascular risk factor(s) were recruited. The mean age was 60.2 (±8.2). The majority were Malays (86.2%) and half of them were males (52.2%). The total mean (±SD) usability score was 5.26 (±0.67) indicating a high usability of the app. Usability of the app declined with increasing age in the simple linear regressions analysis. The multiple linear regressions yielded that being Malay (b = 0.31, 95% CI 0.08,0.54), using the app at home to understand their medications (b = 0.33, 95% CI 0.12,0.53) and having social support from family members and friends (b = 0.28, 95% CI 0.07,0.49) were significantly associated with higher usability of the app.
CONCLUSION: The usability of the EMPOWER-SUSTAIN Self-Management Mobile App© was high among patients with cardiovascular risk factors in our primary care clinic. This finding supports the widespread use of this app among our patients. Involvement of family members and friends should be encouraged to improve the usability of the app.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study adapted and translated the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) developed by the WHO SAGE Working Group. The scale underwent a sequential validation process, including back-back translation, content, face, and construct validity for Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). The reliability was tested using internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE)).
RESULTS: The data for EFA and CFA were completed by a separate sample of 125 and 300 HCWs, respectively. The EFA analysis of the C19-VHS-M scale was unidimensional with 10 items. A further CFA analysis revealed a uniform set of nine items with acceptable goodness fit indices (comparative fit index = 0.997, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.995, incremental fit index = 0.997, chi-squared/degree of freedom = 1.352, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.034). The Cronbach's alpha, CR and AVE results were 0.953, 0.95 and 0.70, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire was valid and reliable for use in the Malay language.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to (1) compare the detection rate of genetically confirmed FH and diagnostic accuracy between the FAMCAT, SB, and DLCC in the Malaysian primary care setting; (2) identify the genetic mutation profiles, including novel variants, in individuals with suspected FH in primary care; (3) explore the experience, concern, and expectation of individuals with suspected FH who have undergone genetic testing in primary care; and (4) evaluate the clinical utility of a web-based FH Identification Tool that includes the FAMCAT, SB, and DLCC in the Malaysian primary care setting.
METHODS: This is a mixed methods evaluation study conducted in 11 Ministry of Health primary care clinics located at the central administrative region of Malaysia. In Work stream 1, the diagnostic accuracy study design is used to compare the detection rate and diagnostic accuracy of the FAMCAT, SB, and DLCC against molecular diagnosis as the gold standard. In Work stream 2, the targeted next-generation sequencing of the 4 FHCGs is used to identify the genetic mutation profiles among individuals with suspected FH. In Work stream 3a, a qualitative semistructured interview methodology is used to explore the experience, concern, and expectation of individuals with suspected FH who have undergone genetic testing. Lastly, in Work stream 3b, a qualitative real-time observation of primary care physicians using the "think-aloud" methodology is applied to evaluate the clinical utility of a web-based FH Identification Tool.
RESULTS: The recruitment for Work stream 1, and blood sampling and genetic analysis for Work stream 2 were completed in February 2023. Data collection for Work stream 3 was completed in March 2023. Data analysis for Work streams 1, 2, 3a, and 3b is projected to be completed by June 2023, with the results of this study anticipated to be published by December 2023.
CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide evidence on which clinical diagnostic criterion is the best to detect FH in the Malaysian primary care setting. The full spectrum of genetic mutations in the FHCGs including novel pathogenic variants will be identified. Patients' perspectives while undergoing genetic testing and the primary care physicians experience in utilizing the web-based tool will be established. These findings will have tremendous impact on the management of patients with FH in primary care and subsequently reduce their risk of premature coronary artery disease.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/47911.
METHODS: Four validation groups were extracted from a longitudinal community-based study dataset of 12,573 participants aged ≥18 years to validate the Framingham Risk Score (FRS), Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2), Revised Pooled Cohort Equations (RPCE), and World Health Organization cardiovascular disease (WHO CVD) models. Two measures of validation are examined: discrimination and calibration. Outcome of interest was 10-year risk of CVD events (fatal and non-fatal). SCORE2 and RPCE performances were compared to SCORE and PCE, respectively.
FINDINGS: FRS (AUC = 0.750) and RPCE (AUC = 0.752) showed good discrimination in CVD risk prediction. Although FRS and RPCE have poor calibration, FRS demonstrates smaller discordance for FRS vs. RPCE (298% vs. 733% in men, 146% vs. 391% in women). Other models had reasonable discrimination (AUC = 0.706-0.732). Only SCORE2-Low, -Moderate and -High (aged <50) had good calibration (X2 goodness-of-fit, P-value = 0.514, 0.189, 0.129, respectively). SCORE2 and RPCE showed improvements compared to SCORE (AUC = 0.755 vs. 0.747, P-value <0.001) and PCE (AUC = 0.752 vs. 0.546, P-value <0.001), respectively. Almost all risk models overestimated 10-year CVD risk by 3%-1430%.
INTERPRETATION: In Malaysians, RPCE are evaluated be the most clinically useful to predict CVD risk. Additionally, SCORE2 and RPCE outperformed SCORE and PCE, respectively.
FUNDING: This work was supported by the Malaysian Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MOSTI) (Grant No: TDF03211036).
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 390 participants from a primary care clinic in Selangor, Malaysia, between February and June 2022. The inclusion criteria were high-CV risk individuals, that is, Framingham risk score >20%, diabetes without target organ damage, stage 3 kidney disease, and very high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >4.9 mmol/L or blood pressure (BP) >180/110 mmHg. Individuals with existing CVD were excluded. The treatment targets were BP <140/90 mmHg (≤135/75 for diabetics), LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L, and HbA1c ≤6.5%. Multiple logistic regressions determined the association between sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, health literacy, and medication adherence with the achievements of each target.
RESULTS: About 7.2% achieved all treatment targets. Of these, 35.1% reached systolic and diastolic (46.7%) BP targets. About 60.2% and 28.2% achieved optimal LDL-C and HbA1c, respectively. Working participants had lower odds of having optimal systolic (aOR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.13-0.90) and diastolic (aOR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.96) BP. Those who adhered to treatments were more likely to achieve LDL-C and HbA1c targets; (aOR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.10-2.69) and (aOR = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.25-4.83), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The control of risk factors among high CV risk patients in this study was suboptimal. Urgent measures such as improving medication adherence are warranted.
METHODOLOGY: Using the software-development-life-cycle (SDLC) iterative model, storyboard and wireframe were drafted; and a mock prototype was designed to illustrate the content and function graphically. Subsequently, a working prototype was developed. Qualitative studies using the 'think-aloud' and cognitive-task-analysis methods were conducted for the utility and usability testing. Topic guide was based on the 10-Nielsen's-Heuristic-Principles. Utility testing was conducted among PCP in which they 'thought-aloud' while performing tasks using the mobile app. Usability testing was conducted among MetS patients after they were given the app for 3 weeks. They 'thought-aloud' while performing tasks using the app. Interviews were audio- and video-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was performed.
RESULT: Seven PCP and nine patients participated in the utility and usability testing, respectively. Six themes (efficiency of use, user control and freedom, appearance and aesthetic features, clinical content, error prevention, and help and documentation) emerged. PCP found the mobile app attractive and relevant sections were easy to find. They suggested adding 'zoom/swipe' functions and some parts needed bigger fonts. Patients commented that the app was user-friendly, has nice interface, and straightforward language. It helped them understand their health better. Based on these findings, the mobile app was refined.
CONCLUSION: This app was produced using a robust SDLC method to increase users' satisfaction and sustainability of its use. It could potentially improve self-management behaviour among MetS patients in primary care.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional analysis from the baseline recruitment (years 2007 to 2011) of an ongoing prospective study involving 11,288 participants from 40 rural and urban communities in Malaysia. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify characteristics associated with LLM use.
RESULTS: Majority (74.2%) of participants with CVD were not on LLM. Only 10.5% of participants with high FRS-CVD score, and 17.1% with diabetes were on LLM. Participants who were obese (OR = 1.80, 95% CI: 1.15-2.83), have diabetes (OR = 2.38, 95% CI: 1.78-3.19), have hypertension (OR = 2.87, 95% CI: 2.09-3.95), and attained tertiary education (OR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.06-4.78) were more likely to be on LLM. Rural residents had lower odds of being on LLM (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.41-0.82). In the primary prevention group, participants with high FRS-CVD score (OR = 3.81, 95% CI: 2.78-5.23) and high-income earners (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.06-2.24) had higher odds of being on LLM.
CONCLUSIONS: LLM use among high CVD-risk individuals in the primary prevention group, and also among individuals with existing CVD was low. While CVD risk factors and global cardiovascular risk score were positively associated with LLM use, sociodemographic disparities were observed among the less-educated, rural residents and low-income earners. Measures are needed to ensure optimal and equitable use of LLM.
METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted at a university primary care clinic. Patients aged 18 to 80 years old with MetS were recruited. Socio-demographic characteristic, clinical characteristics and information on TCM use and its pattern were recorded in a proforma. Patient's experience of chronic disease conventional care was measured using PACIC-M questionnaire. The comparison of PACIC-M mean score between TCM users and non-users was measured using independent t-test. The factors associated with TCM use were determined by simple logistic regression (SLogR), followed by multiple logistic regression (MLogR).
RESULTS: Out of 394 participants, 381 (96.7%) were included in the final analysis. Of the 381 participants, 255 (66.9%) were TCM users (95% CI 62.7, 71.7). Only 36.9% of users disclosed about TCM use to their health care providers (HCP). The overall mean PACIC-M score was 2.91 (SD ± 0.04). TCM users had significantly higher mean PACIC-M score compared to non-users (2.98 ± 0.74 vs 2.75 ± 0.72, p = 0.01). The independent factors associated with TCM use were being female (Adj. OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.55, 4.06), having high education level (Adj. OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.37, 3.41) and having high overall PACIC-M mean score (Adj. OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10, 2.03).
CONCLUSION: TCM use was highly prevalent in this primary care clinic. However, the disclosure rate of TCM use to HCP was low. Females, those with high education and high PACIC-M mean score were more likely to use TCM. Further research should explore the reasons for their TCM use, despite having good experience in conventional chronic disease care.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will identify observational studies through comprehensive literature searches. We will search: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for published studies and trial registries including the WHO International Trial Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts, attain full text of eligible articles, extract data, and appraise the quality and bias of the included studies. Disagreement among the authors will be resolved by discussion leading to a consensus. Next, we will perform a narrative synthesis of the study results. Study heterogeneity will be assessed using I2 statistics. If I2 is high (≥75%), and plausible heterogeneity contributors are found, we will divide the studies into appropriate subgroups for pooling of results or assess the association of plausible covariates and the prevalence estimates using meta-regression. If I2<75%, we will undertake meta-analysis using the random-effects model and transform all prevalence estimates using the Freeman-Tukey transformation for pooling, to obtain a synthesised point estimate of prevalence with its 95% confidence. We will then back-transform the point estimate, and report our results using the back-transformed figures.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not a requirement as this study is based on available published data. Results of this systematic review will be presented at conferences, shared with relevant health authorities, and published in a peer-reviewed journal. These results may help quantify the magnitude of dyslipidaemia globally, and guide preventative and therapeutic interventions.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020200281.