METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of COPD patients who attended the outpatient clinic of the Serian Divisional Hospital and Bau District Hospital from 23th January 2018 to 22th January 2019. The HRQoL was assessed using modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-c).
RESULTS: Of 185 patients, 108 (58.4%) were non-exacerbators (NON-AE), 51 (27.6%) were frequent exacerbators (AE), and the remaining 26 (14.1%) had asthma-COPD overlap (ACO). Of AE patients, 42 (82.4%) had chronic bronchitis and only 9 (17.6%) had emphysema. Of the 185 COPD patients, 65.9% had exposure to biomass fuel and 69.1% were ex- or current smokers. The scores of mMRC, CAT, and SGRQ-c were significantly different between COPD phenotypes (p
Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of patients with COPD attending the respiratory medicine clinic of University of Malaya Medical Centre from 1 June 2017 to 31 May 2018. Disease-specific HRQoL was assessed by using the COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-c).
Results: Of 189 patients, 28.6% were of non-exacerbator phenotype (NON-AE), 18.5% were of exacerbator with emphysema phenotype (AE NON-CB), 39.7% were of exacerbator with chronic bronchitis phenotype (AE CB), and 13.2% had asthma-COPD overlap syndrome phenotype (ACOS). The total CAT and SGRQ-c scores were significantly different between the clinical phenotypes (P<0.001). Patients who were AE CB had significantly higher total CAT score than those with ACOS (P=0.033), AE NON-CB (P=0.001), and NON-AE (P<0.001). Concerning SGRQ-c, patients who were AE CB also had a significantly higher total score than those with AE NON-CB (P=0.001) and NON-AE (P<0.001). However, the total SGRQ-c score of AE CB patients was only marginally higher than those who had ACOS (P=0.187). There was a significant difference in the score of each CAT item (except CAT 7) and SGRQ-c components between clinical phenotypes, with AE CB patients recording the highest score in each of them.
Conclusion: Patients who were AE CB had significantly poorer HRQoL than other clinical phenotypes and recorded the worst score in each of the CAT items and SGRQ-c components. Therefore, AE CB patients may warrant a different treatment approach that focuses on the exacerbation and chronic bronchitis components.
METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of pooled data from two cross-sectional studies that were previously conducted in Malaysia from 2017 to 2019, the results of which had been published separately. The parameters measured included post-bronchodilator FEV1 (PB-FEV1), exacerbations, and scores of modified Medical Research Council (mMRC), COPD Assessment Test (CAT), and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-c). Descriptive, association, and correlation statistics were used.
RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-four patients were included in the analysis. The PB-FEV1 predicted was
OBJECTIVE: To assess knowledge and perceptions regarding PD in a large multiethnic urban Asian cohort of patients and caregivers.
METHODS: We conducted a survey at a university hospital neurology clinic, using a novel Knowledge and Perception of Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (KPPDQ).
RESULTS: The KPPDQ had satisfactory psychometric properties among patients and caregivers. Five hundred subjects were recruited with a 97% response rate (211 patients, 273 caregivers). Non-motor symptoms such as urinary problems, visual hallucinations and pain were relatively poorly recognized. Many (≈ 50-80%) respondents incorrectly believed that all PD patients experience tremor, that PD is usually familial, and that there is a cure for PD. About one-half perceived PD to be caused by something the patient had done in the past, and that PD medications were likely to cause internal organ damage. Issues of stigma/shame were relevant to one-third of patients, and 70% of patients perceived themselves to be a burden to others. Two-thirds of participants felt that PD imposed a heavy financial toll. Participants were about equally divided as to whether they would consider treatment with deep brain stimulation, tube feeding or invasive ventilation. Over three-quarters of patients expressed a preference to die at home.
CONCLUSIONS: Important knowledge gaps, misperceptions and perspectives on PD were identified, highlighting the need for further efforts to raise awareness and provide accurate information regarding PD, and to address patient's and caregivers' needs and preferences.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether (1) utilization rates; (2) demographics and preoperative statuses; and (3) clinical outcomes differ among Chinese, Malays, and Indians undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is a marked racial disparity in spine surgery outcomes between white and African American patients. Comparative studies of ethnicity have mostly been carried out in American populations, with an underrepresentation of Asian ethnic groups. It is unclear whether these disparities exist among Chinese, Malays, and Indians.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained registry was reviewed for 753 patients who underwent primary MIS-TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis between 2006 and 2013. The cohort was stratified by race. Comparisons of demographics, functional outcomes, and patient satisfaction were performed preoperatively and 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 2 years postoperatively.
RESULTS: Compared with population statistics, there was an overrepresentation of Chinese (6.6%) and an underrepresentation of Malays (5.0%) and Indians (3.5%) who underwent MIS-TLIF. Malays and Indians were younger and had higher body mass index at the time of surgery compared with Chinese. After adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index, Malays had significantly worse back pain and Indians had poorer Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary compared with Chinese preoperatively. Chinese also had a better preoperative Oswestry Disability Index compared with the other races. Although significant differences remained at 1 month, there was no difference in outcomes up to 2 years postoperatively, except for a lower Physical Component Summary in Indians compared with Chinese at 2 years. The rate of minimal clinically important difference attainment, satisfaction, and expectation fulfillment was also comparable. At 2 years, 87.0% of Chinese, 76.9% of Malays, and 91.7% of Indians were satisfied.
CONCLUSION: The variations in demographics, preoperative statuses, and postoperative outcomes between races should be considered when interpreting outcome studies of lumbar spine surgery in Asian populations.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-nonrandomized cohort study.
AIM: To investigate the attitudes and perceptions of morphine use in cancer pain in advanced cancer patients and their caregivers and to examine the influence of caregivers' attitudes and perceptions on patients' acceptance of morphine.
DESIGN: Qualitative study involving semi-structured individual interviews transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically.
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: A total of 18 adult opioid-naïve patients with advanced cancer and 13 caregivers (n = 31) were recruited at a private tertiary hospital via convenience sampling.
RESULTS: Attitudes and perceptions of morphine were influenced by previous experiences. Prevalent themes were similar in both groups, including perceptions that morphine was a strong analgesic that reduced suffering, but associated with end-stage illness and dependence. Most participants were open to future morphine use for comfort and effective pain control. Trust in doctors' recommendations was also an important factor. However, many preferred morphine as a last resort because of concerns about side effects and dependence, and the perception that morphine was only used at the terminal stage. Caregivers' attitudes toward morphine did not affect patients' acceptance of morphine use.
CONCLUSION: Most participants were open to future morphine use despite negative perceptions as they prioritized optimal pain control and reduction of suffering. Focused education programs addressing morphine misperceptions might increase patient and caregiver acceptance of opioid analgesics and improve cancer pain control.
OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effects of a five-minute mindful breathing practice performed three times per day for three months on perceived stress and mindfulness among patients with cancer.
METHODS: This longitudinal, randomized controlled study used a two-group, pre-/post-study design. Patients with distress scores of 4 or higher were randomized into two study arms. Participants in the intervention group were educated on mindfulness and guided on how to perform a five-minute mindful breathing practice. Perceived stress and mindfulness were assessed at baseline, one month postintervention, and three months postintervention.
FINDINGS: Both groups had no significant difference in perceived stress and mindfulness scores at baseline. At three months, the intervention group reported a significant reduction in stress and an increase in mindfulness.
METHOD: This was a pilot, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial. The intervention group received a guided video and was briefed to perform the exercise twice a week for two weeks while the waitlist control group only received the video upon completion of the study. The subjects were assessed at three-time points (T0: Baseline, T1: 2 weeks after the intervention, T2: 4 weeks after intervention), using the Neurological Disorders Depression Index (NDDI-E), General Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory (QOLIE-31) and Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS).
RESULTS: Twenty patients were recruited, with 10 in the intervention and waitlist-control groups. Compared with the waitlist-control group, participants in the intervention group showed significant improvement in NDDI-E at T1 (p = 0.022) but not at T2 (p = 0.056) and greater improvement in GAD-7 at T1 and T2 but not statistically significant. The QOLIE-31 overall score in the intervention group has significantly improved at T1 (p = 0.036) and T2 (p = 0.031) compared to the waitlist-control group. For MAAS, the intervention group also had an increased score at T2 (p = 0.025).
CONCLUSION: The 20-minute mindfulness breathing exercise has an immediate effect in improving depression and quality of life among people with epilepsy.
METHODS: We conducted a parallel-group, blinded, randomized controlled study at the University of Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC), Malaysia from February 2019 to April 2019. Sixty adult palliative care patients with an overall suffering score of 4/10 or above based on the Suffering Pictogram were recruited and randomly assigned to either the 5-min mindfulness of love group (N = 30) or the 5-min supportive listening group (N = 30).
RESULTS: There were statistically significant improvements in the overall suffering score (mean difference = -2.9, CI = -3.7 to -2.1, t = -7.268, p = 0.000) and the total FACIT-Sp-12 score (mean difference = 2.9, CI = 1.5 to 4.3, t = 4.124, p = 0.000) in the intervention group compared to the control group.
CONCLUSION: The results provided evidence that 5-min mindfulness of love could affect the actual state of suffering and the spiritual quality of life of palliative care patients.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of our study was to determine the efficacy of a single session of 20 min mindful breathing in alleviating multiple symptoms in palliative care.
METHODS: Adult palliative care in patients with at least one symptom scoring ≥5/10 based on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) were recruited from September 2018 to December 2018. Recruited patients were randomly assigned to either 20 min mindful breathing and standard care or standard care alone.
RESULTS: Forty patients were randomly assigned to standard care plus a 20 min mindful breathing session (n=20) or standard care alone (n=20). There was statistically significant reduction of total ESAS score in the mindful breathing group compared with the control group at minute 20 (U=98, n 1 = n 2 = 20, mean rank 1 = 15.4, mean rank 2 = 25.6, median reduction 1 = 6.5, median reduction 2 = 1.5, z=-2.763, r=0.3, p=0.005).
CONCLUSION: Our results provided evidence that a single session of 20 min mindful breathing was effective in reducing multiple symptoms rapidly for palliative care patients.
OBJECTIVE: To study the efficacy of 5 minutes of mindful breathing (MB) for rapid reduction of distress in a palliative setting. Its effect to the physiological changes of the palliative cancer patients was also examined.
METHODS: This is a randomized controlled trial. Sixty palliative cancer patients were recruited. They were randomly assigned to either 5 minutes of MB or normal listening arms. The changes of perceived distress, blood pressure, pulse rate, breathing rate, galvanic skin response, and skin surface temperature of the patients were measured at baseline, after intervention, and 10 minutes post-intervention.
RESULTS: There was significant reduction of perceived distress, blood pressure, pulse rate, breathing rate, and galvanic skin response; also, significant increment of skin surface temperature in the 5-minute MB group. The changes in the 5-minute breathing group were significantly higher than the normal listening group.
CONCLUSION: Five-minute MB is a quick, easy to administer, and effective therapy for rapid reduction of distress in palliative setting. There is a need for future study to establish the long-term efficacy of the therapy.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among patients on warfarin for NVAF who attended the anticoagulant clinic of a tertiary cardiology referral center in Sarawak from 1st June 2018 to 31st May 2019. Patients' TTR was calculated by using Rosendaal technique, while their HRQoL and treatment satisfaction were assessed by using Short Form 12 Health Survey version 2 (SF12v2) and Duke Anticoagulant Satisfaction Scale (DASS), respectively.
RESULTS: A total of 300 patients were included, with mean TTR score of 47.0 ± 17.3%. The physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) score of SF-12v2 were 47.0 ± 9.0 and 53.5 ± 9.6, respectively. The total score for DASS was 55.2 ± 21.3, while the score for limitations (L), hassles and burdens (H&B) and positive psychological impacts (PPI) were 18.0 ± 10.0, 15.6 ± 9.1 and 21.6 ± 5.9, respectively. Seventy-three (24.3%) patients had good TTR (≥ 60%), with mean of 70.2 ± 8.7%; while 227 (75.5%) patients with poor TTR had significantly lower mean of 39.5 ± 11.9% (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in the score of PCS (p = 0.150), MCS (p = 0.919) and each domain of SF-12v2 (p = 0.184-0.684) between good and poor TTR, except for social functioning (p = 0.019). The total DASS score was also not significantly different between group (p = 0.779). Similar non-significant difference was also reported in all the DASS sub dimensions (p = 0.502-0.699).
CONCLUSIONS: Majority of the patients on long-term warfarin for NVAF in the current study have poor TTR. Their HRQoL and treatment satisfaction are independent of their TTR. Achieving a good TTR do not compromise the HRQoL and treatment satisfaction. Therefore, appropriate measures should be taken to optimise INR control, failing which direct oral anticoagulant therapy should be considered.
Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) on long-term anticoagulant therapy attending the cardiology clinic and anticoagulation clinic of the University Malaya Medical Centre from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2018. Patient QOL was assessed by using the Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF12), while treatment satisfaction was assessed by using the Perception of Anticoagulation Treatment Questionnaire 2 (PACT-Q2).
Results: A total of 208 patients were recruited; 52.4% received warfarin and 47.6% received DOAC. There was no significant difference in QOL between warfarin and DOAC based on SF12 (physical QOL, P=0.083; mental QOL, P=0.665). Nevertheless, patients in the DOAC group were significantly more satisfied with their treatment compared to the warfarin group based on PACT-Q2 (P=0.004). The hospitalisation rate was significantly higher in the warfarin group than the DOAC group (15.6% versus 3.0%, P=0.002). Clinically relevant minor bleeds and severe bleeding events were non-significantly higher in the warfarin group than the DOAC group (66.7% versus 40.0%, P=0.069).
Conclusion: Compared to warfarin, treatment of NVAF and VTE with DOAC showed comparable QOL, higher treatment satisfaction, lesser hospitalization, and a non-significant trend toward fewer bleeding episodes.