Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study used prescription databases of tertiary hospital settings in Malaysia from 2010 to 2016. Prescriptions for nine NSAIDs (diclofenac, ketoprofen, etoricoxib, celecoxib, ibuprofen, indomethacin, mefenamic acid, meloxicam, and naproxen), tramadol, and five other opioids (morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl, buprenorphine, and dihydrocodeine) prescribed for children aged <18 years were included. Number of annual patients and prescriptions were measured and analyzed using Stata v15.
Results: During a 7-year study period, a total of 5040 analgesic prescriptions of the nine NSAIDs, tramadol, and five other opioids were prescribed for 2460 pediatric patients (81.8% NSAIDs patients, 17.9% tramadol patients, and 0.3% opioid patients). Ibuprofen was the primary analgesic in young children less than 12 years old (≤2 years old [y.o.] [75%], 3-5 y.o. [85%], and 6-12 y.o. [56.3%]). However, there was a wide range of analgesics used in older children (>12 y.o.) with the majority for naproxen (13-15 y.o. (28.2%) and 16-17 y.o. (28.2%). Other frequently prescribed analgesics for older children included ibuprofen (20.6%) and diclofenac (18.2%) for 12-15 y.o. and diclofenac (26.7%) and tramadol (17.6%) for 16-17 y.o.
Conclusion: Ibuprofen was the primary analgesic for children less than 12 y.o., whereas there was a wide range of analgesics prescribed for children age >12 y.o. including naproxen, diclofenac, and tramadol.
Objective: This study examined research productivity of NSAIDs in Malaysia.
Materials and Methods: This bibliometric study included all published research articles on NSAIDs from 1979 to 2018, which were conducted in Malaysia. The search databases such as Google Scholar, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Scopus were used. Search terms included NSAIDs and specific drug names such as ibuprofen, celecoxib, and naproxen. Growth of publication, authorship pattern, citation analysis, journal index, type of studies, and geographical distribution of institutions publishing articles on NSAIDs were measured.
Results: Overall, 111 articles were retrieved from 1979 to 2018. The annual productivity of articles throughout the study fluctuated in which the highest productivity was in 2018, 12.61% (n = 14). Majority of articles were multiple authored, 99.10% (n = 109), and University of Science Malaysia (USM) produced the highest number of articles (30 articles). Most of the articles were International Scientific Indexing-indexed, 52.25% (n = 58), and the main issue studied in most of the articles was the drug formulation of NSAIDs.
Conclusion: The growth of NSAID research in Malaysia was slow, and the majority of research involved laboratory studies. Clinical studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of NSAIDs in patients, particularly using large healthcare databases are still lacking.
Materials and Methods: Data of five strong opioids consumption (morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl, pethidine, and methadone) between 2005 and 2014 from Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam were extracted from the Pain and Policy Studies Group. Defined daily doses per 1000 inhabitants per day (DDD/1000 inhabitants/day) was used for calculating the annual amount of opioid use.
Results: The total consumption of five strong opioids was increased in all five Southeast Asian countries during a 10-year study period. Malaysia was recorded with the largest increase of the opioid consumption (993.18%), followed by Indonesia (530.34%), Vietnam (170.17%), Singapore (116.16%), and Thailand (104.66%). Malaysia also had the highest total strong opioid consumption (11.2 DDD/1000 inhabitants/day), primarily for methadone. Among the opioids used for pain management, fentanyl was primarily used in Malaysia and Singapore but the greatest increase in these two countries was for oxycodone. Fentanyl was also primarily used in Indonesia while morphine was predominantly used in Thailand and Vietnam.
Conclusion: Growing trends of strong opioids consumption in all five Southeast Asian countries demonstrated in this study may indicate improved access to opioid analgesics in these countries. Given the increasing trends, it is important to ensure that the utilization of opioids is according to the guideline to prevent the negative consequences of opioids particularly when used in chronic non-cancer pain.
DESIGN: This study was designed as a retrospective cohort study.
SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: In this study, we analysed the prescription databases of tertiary hospitals in Malaysia. This study included patients aged ≥18 years with at least one opioid prescription (buprenorphine, morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl, dihydrocodeine or tramadol) between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016. These patients had no opioid prescriptions in the 365 days prior, and were followed up for 365 days after the initial opioid prescription.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were the number of short-term (<90 days) and long-term opioid users (≥90 days), initial opioid prescription period and daily dose.
RESULTS: There were 33 752 opioid-naïve patients who received opioid prescriptions (n=43 432 prescriptions) during the study period. Of these, 29 824 (88.36%) were short-term opioid users and 3928 (11.64%) were long-term opioid users. The majority of these short-term (99.09%) and long-term users (96.18%) received an initial daily opioid dose of <50 mg/day with a short-acting opioid formulation. Short-term opioid users were predominantly prescribed opioids for 3-7 days (59.06%) by the emergency department (ED, 60.56%), while long-term opioid users were primarily prescribed opioids for ≥7 days (91.85%) by non-ED hospital departments (91.8%). The adjusted model showed that the following were associated with long-term opioid use: increasing opioid daily doses, prescription period ≥7 days and long-acting opioids initiated by non-EDs.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of opioid-naïve patients in tertiary hospital settings in Malaysia were prescribed opioids for short-term use. The progression to long-term use among opioid-naïve patients was attributed to the prescription of higher opioid doses for a longer duration as well as long-acting opioids initiated by non-ED hospital departments.
DESIGNS: Retrospective cross-sectional study.
SETTING: PMCare claims database from January 2016 to August 2019.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 83,556 outpatient clinic visits involving 10,150 IIUM employees of the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) to private general practitioners (GPs). During the study period, IIUM adopts the incentive structure of capping coverage at Ringgit Malaysia (RM) 45/outpatient visit (USD 10.58) to cover for consultation fees and medicine costs.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The monthly percentage change in the number of clinic visits, medicine costs, consultation fees and total costs between January 2016 and August 2019. A simple linear regression using Stata v15.1 was also performed to measure the association between the characteristics of the prescribed medicines and medicine charges.
RESULTS: The number of clinic visits per patient increased by 17% from January 2016 to August 2019, with consultation fees increasing by 113.9% and total costs by 7.9% per clinic visit per patient. Conversely, the cost of medicines and the number of medicines prescribed per clinic visit per patient decreased by 39.7% and 6.3%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Within the incentive structure of capping the total amount of coverage per clinic visit, medicine costs were reduced by decreasing the number of medicines prescribed, to offset the increased consultation fees. This may create perverse incentives that affect medicine use with negative consequences for the health system and health insurers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study where patients (aged ≥18 years) with noncancer pain treated with opioids were recruited from three pain clinics in Malaysia. Data on patients' opioid use were collected from prescription records. The individual days covered with opioids per patient were calculated and based on this, patients were classified as short-term (<90 days) or long-term (≥90 days) opioid user. Outcome measures included pain intensity and pain interference with daily activities assessed by Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form (BPI-SF), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessed by 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2). These measures were compared between short-term and long-term opioid users.
RESULTS: Of the 61 noncancer pain patients recruited, 49.2% (n = 30/61) were short-term and 50.8% (n = 31/61) were long-term opioid users. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean scores of pain intensity, pain interference with daily activities, and HRQoL between short-term and long-term opioid users in this study.
CONCLUSION: Findings of this study imply that long-term opioid therapy does not provide significant pain relief or improvement in patients' functional capability and HRQoL in noncancer pain patients. Future prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed to support the findings of this study.
METHOD: This study utilized modified e-Delphi method to build consensus. A validated e-Delphi survey was administered to a purposive sample of 29 experts. Consensus was pre-defined to be the point where >85% of the experts fall in either agree or strongly agree category for each statement. The inter-expert agreement was computed in both rounds using Intra-class correlation coefficient and Kendall's W. Delphi operates in an iterative fashion till there comes stability in responses. At the end of each round, experts were provided aggregate response, their own response and choice to change their response in the light of aggregate response.
RESULTS: Response rate was 70.73% and 100% in 1st and 2nd round, respectively. Consensus was achieved on 119/132 statements which mainly referred to the need, structural and regulatory aspects of CMTM model in Malaysia. However, there were some flashpoints on dispensing separation and means to finance this model. Stability in response of experts was achieved after 2nd round; hence, no next round was executed.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the study findings witnessed the expert panel's support for the CMTM model. Study helped to sketch CMTM model and facilitated development of some recommendations to the authorities which may help to formulate a policy to bring CPs under a working relationship with GPs. Hence, this study should be taken as a call for redefining of the roles of CPs and GPs in Malaysia.