METHOD: A cross-sectional survey on the demographics, knowledge and attitudes of the doctors and nurses working in critical care areas was undertaken by the random sampling method, using a validated, structured questionnaire. HCP's knowledge and attitudes towards brain death (BD), DOD, organ transplantation (OT), and possession of organ donor card were compared against their demographics.
RESULTS: Four hundred and twelve (72.9%) out of the total 565 HCPs in critical care areas responded of whom 163 (39.6%) were doctors and 249 (60.4%) were nurses. After adjusting for other factors, department of work and profession were highly correlated with the overall knowledge score (p<0.001 and p=0.003 respectively) and knowledge about BD (p<0.001 and p=0.013 respectively). HCPs from the neurosurgical intensive care unit (p<0.001) and doctors (p<0.001) had higher mean knowledge scores compared to their counterparts. Profession was most significantly correlated with having a positive attitude towards BD (p<0.001) and OT (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Department, profession and ethnicity were the demographic characteristics that correlated with knowledge and attitudes of HCPs on organ donation. Efforts to improve DOD rates in Malaysia should include targeted interventions to address the knowledge and attitudes of HCPs working in critical care areas.
METHODS: The Question, Persuade, Refer program materials were translated and adapted for implementation in the hospital setting for nonpsychiatric health professionals. There were 159 (mean age = 35.75 years; SD = 12.26) participants in this study. Most participants were female (84.9%), staff/community nurses (52.2%), who worked in the general medical department (30.2%) and had no experience managing suicidal patients (64.2%). Intervention participants (n = 53) completed a survey questionnaire at pretraining, immediately after training, and after three months. Control participants (n = 106) were not exposed to the training program and completed the same questionnaire at baseline and three months later.
RESULTS: Significant improvement occurred among intervention participants in terms of perceived knowledge, self-efficacy, and understanding of/willingness to help suicidal patients immediately after training and when compared with the control participants 3 months later. Improvements in declarative knowledge were not maintained at the 3-month follow-up.
DISCUSSION: This study confirmed the short-term effectiveness of the gatekeeper training program. Gatekeeper suicide training is recommended for implementation for nonpsychiatric health professionals nationwide.
AIMS: To determine the national self-reported incidence and risk factors for NSI among Malaysian Ministry of Health (MOH) HCWs.
METHODS: Using data from the MOH national sharps injury surveillance programme, information on reported NSIs over a 1-year period (2016) for different HCW subgroups were extracted and analysed.
RESULTS: A total of 1234 NSI cases were reported in 2016, giving an overall incidence of 6 injuries per 1000 HCWs. Medical doctors recorded the highest incidence (21.1 per 1000 HCWs) followed by dental staff (7.5), pharmacy staff (4.2), nurses (3.7), medical assistants (3.4) and allied and auxiliary staff (1.0). Doctors had significantly increased risk of NSI compared with allied and auxiliary staff (relative risk [RR] = 20.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.5-27.5), medical assistants (RR = 6.1, 95% CI 4.5-8.2), nurses (RR = 5.7, 95% CI 5.0-6.6), pharmacy staff (RR = 5.0, 95% CI 3.7-6.6) and dental staff (RR = 2.8, 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Significant differences were found in age and sharps- handling experience between occupational subgroups (P < 0.001 for both variables). Male employees had higher risk than females (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.18-1.50), with a significant difference seen in their sharps-handling experience (P < 0.01). Important risk factors included unsafe practices such as recapping of needles and their improper disposal.
CONCLUSIONS: The national incidence of NSI amongst Malaysian HCWs was lower compared with other countries, but unsafe practices remain an important concern. There is a need to formulate, implement and monitor safe and consistent practices for the different healthcare professionals.
METHOD: Outcomes derived from a systematic review, multi-disciplinary expert panel and patient input were included in a multilanguage online survey. Participants rated the absolute importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7-9 being critically important). The relative importance was determined by a best-worst scale using multinomial logistic regression. Open text responses were analysed thematically.
RESULTS: The survey was completed by 873 participants [224 (26%) patients/caregivers and 649 (74%) health professionals] from 58 countries. Vascular access function was considered the most important outcome (mean score 7.8 for patients and caregivers/8.5 for health professionals, with 85%/95% rating it critically important, and top ranked on best-worst scale), followed by infection (mean 7.4/8.2, 79%/92% rating it critically important, second rank on best-worst scale). Health professionals rated all outcomes of equal or higher importance than patients/caregivers, except for aneurysms. We identified six themes: necessity for HD, applicability across vascular access types, frequency and severity of debilitation, minimizing the risk of hospitalization and death, optimizing technical competence and adherence to best practice and direct impact on appearance and lifestyle.
CONCLUSIONS: Vascular access function was the most critically important outcome among patients/caregivers and health professionals. Consistent reporting of this outcome across trials in HD will strengthen their value in supporting vascular access practice and shared decision making in patients requiring HD.
METHODOLOGY: A total of 571 healthcare workers at COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 wards as well as the emergency department and laboratory staff at COVID-19 testing labs were recruited. The presence of novel human coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and IgM/IgG antibodies were confirmed in all healthcare workers. The healthcare workers responded to an online Google Forms questionnaire that evaluates demographic information and comorbidities, exposure and adherence to infection prevention and control measures against COVID-19. Descriptive analysis was performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 24.0.
RESULTS: Three healthcare workers (0.5%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, while the remaining 568 (99.5%) were negative. All were negative for IgM and IgG antibodies during recruitment (day 1) and follow-up (day 15). More than 90% of the healthcare workers followed infection prevention and control practices recommendations regardless of whether they have been exposed to occupational risk for COVID-19.
CONCLUSIONS: The healthcare workers' high level of adherence to infection prevention practices at this hospital helped reduce and minimize their occupational exposure to COVID-19.