PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 120 men, aged 40-70 years, with TD (serum total testosterone [TT] ≤ 12 nmol/L) were randomised to receive either i.m. TU (1000 mg) or placebo. In all, 58 and 56 men in the placebo and treatment arm, respectively, completed the study. Participants were seen six times in the 48-week period and the following data were collected: physical examination results, haemoglobin, haematocrit, TT, lipid profile, fasting blood glucose, sex hormone-binding globulin, liver function test, prostate- specific antigen (PSA) and adverse events.
RESULTS: The mean (sd) age of the participants was 53.4 (7.6) years. A significant increase in serum TT (P < 0.001), PSA (P = 0.010), haematocrit (P < 0.001), haemoglobin (P < 0.001) and total bilirubin (P = 0.001) were seen in the treatment arm over the 48-week period. Two men in the placebo arm and one man in the treatment arm developed myocardial infarction. Common adverse events observed in the treatment arm included itching/swelling/pain at the site of injection, flushing and acne. Overall, TU injections were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS: TU significantly increases serum testosterone in men with TD. PSA, haemoglobin and haematocrit were significantly elevated but were within clinically safe limits. There was no significant adverse reaction that led to the cessation of treatment.
METHODS: In this study, we conducted a comprehensive literature review to collect information on healthcare decision-making in Malaysia. We also consulted medical education researchers, key opinion leaders, governmental organisations, and patient support groups to assess the extent to which patient involvement was incorporated into the medical curriculum, healthcare policies, and legislation.
RESULTS: There are very few studies on patient involvement in decision-making in Malaysia. Existing studies showed that doctors were aware of informed consent, but few practised SDM. There was limited teaching of SDM in undergraduate and postgraduate curricula and a lack of accurate and accessible health information for patients. In addition, peer support groups and 'expert patient' programmes were also lacking. Professional medical bodies endorsed patient involvement in decision-making, but there was no definitive implementation plan.
CONCLUSION: In summary, there appears to be little training or research on SDM in Malaysia. More research needs to be done in this area, including baseline information on the preferred and actual decision-making roles. The authors have provided a set of recommendations on how SDM can be effectively implemented in Malaysia.
METHODS: A multiple case study underpinning the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework was carried out in three public hospitals with differing rates of IVT using a multiple method design. Twenty-five in-depth interviews and 12 focus groups discussions were conducted among 89 healthcare providers, along with a survey on hospital resources and a medical records review to identify reasons for not receiving IVT. Qualitative data were analysed using reflective thematic method, before triangulated with quantitative findings.
RESULTS: Of five factors identified, three factors that distinctively influenced the variation of IVT across the hospitals were: 1) leadership through quality stroke champions, 2) team cohesiveness which entailed team dynamics and its degree of alignment and, 3) facilitative work process which included workflow simplification and familiarity with IVT. Two other factors that were consistently identified as barriers in these hospitals included patient factors which largely encompassed delayed presentation, and resource constraints. About 50.0 - 67.6% of ischemic stroke patients missed the opportunity to receive IVT due to delayed presentation.
CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the global effort to explore sustainable measures to improve patients' emergency response for stroke, attempts to improve the provision of IVT for stroke care should also consider the inclusion of interventions targeting on health systems perspectives such as promoting quality leadership, team cohesiveness and workflow optimisation.
METHODS: Ten students who previously underwent the learning module were recruited through purposive sampling. The inclusion criteria were: (a) Fourth-year medical students; and (b) Completed psychiatry posting with the new module. Students who dropped out or were unable to participate in data collection were excluded. Two online focus group discussions (FGDs) with five participants each were conducted by an independent facilitator, guided by a questioning route. The data were transcribed verbatim and coded using the thematic analysis approach to identify themes.
RESULTS: Three main themes of their learning experience were identified: (1) fulfilment of the desired pedagogy (2), realism of the clinical case, and (3) ease of use related to technical settings. The pedagogy theme was further divided into the following subthemes: level of entry for students, flexibility of presentation of content, provision of learning guidance, collaboration with peers, provision of feedback, and assessment of performance. The realism theme had two subthemes: how much the virtual patient experience mimicked an actual patient and how much the case scenario reflected real conditions in the Malaysian context. The technical setting theme entailed two subthemes: access to the software and appearance of the user interface. The study findings are considered in the light of learning formats, pedagogical and learning theories, and technological frameworks.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings shed light on both positive and negative aspects of using virtual patients for medical students' psychiatry posting, which opens room for further improvement of their usage in undergraduate psychiatry education.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study utilised the QUALICOPC study data on primary care performance, which was conducted in 2011-2013 (QUALICOPC in Europe Australia, New Zealand and Canada) and 2015-2016 (Malaysia). A standardised questionnaire was completed by primary care practitioners from participating countries. Multilevel regression analysis and composite scores were constructed to compare the performance of primary care on four process dimensions: accessibility, comprehensiveness, continuity of care and coordination.
RESULTS: The high-income countries with strong primary care performed better in comprehensiveness, continuity and coordination but poorer in accessibility to services compared with upper-middle-income countries. Among the upper-middle-income countries, Malaysia scored the best in comprehensiveness and coordination. None of the studied countries were having consistent performance over all indicators either in their respective best or worst primary care services delivery dimensions.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variation in primary care services delivery across and within the studied countries. The findings indicate room for quality improvement activities to strengthen primary healthcare services. This includes addressing current healthcare challenges in response to the population health needs which are essential for more integrated and efficient primary care services delivery.