Methods: The English-language validated questionnaires using data about demographics and monthly health records were translated into the Chinese language. Both forward and backward translated versions were validated.
Results: The developed demographic and monthly health questionnaires showed an overall item-level content validity index (I-CVI) of 0.99 and 0.97, respectively; while the translated Chinese versions showed I-CVI of 0.97 and 0.98, respectively. Item-level of response process validity index of 1.00 for this questionnaire was obtained from 30 respondents inferring that the items were clear and comprehensible.
Conclusions: This study showed acceptable levels validity in the Chinese translated version, illustrating a valid and reliable tool to be used for simultaneous assessment of gastrointestinal and respiratory tract-related illnesses in young children that is applicable for Malaysia's Chinese population and other Chinese-speaking nations.
METHODS: All VLBW babies born in the hospital or referred for neonatal care during 1993 were enrolled prospectively in the study. At 2 years of age development was assessed using the Griffiths mental scales. Neurological, hearing and visual assessments were graded into five groups according to functional handicap. Control infants were randomly selected during attendance at a primary health care clinic.
RESULTS: One hundred and fifty VLBW infants were admitted and 82 (54.6%) survived to 2 years, of whom 77 (93.9%) were assessed. The mean General Quotient (GQ) on the Griffiths Scales was 94 (15.7) for the study group and 104 (8.3) for the 60 controls. For GQ, 21 (27.3%) of the study population were 1 or more SD below the mean (18 between 1 and 2 SD and 3 > 2 SD) compared with 1 (1.6%) of the controls who was 1-2 SD below the mean. Visual impairment occurred in 2 study infants and none of the controls. There was no hearing impairment in either group. Cerebral palsy occurred in 3 (1 mild and 2 moderate-severe) of the study group and none of the controls. Functionally 18 (23.3%) of the study group had mild handicap, 1 (1.3%) moderate, 2 (2.5%) severe, 2 (2.5%) multiply severe and 54 (70.2%) were normal.
CONCLUSION: Although survival was low, overall rates of functional handicap were similar to those reported in developed countries but the proportion with moderate or severe handicap was low.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to investigate the prevalence of AD in Malaysian children and to understand the pattern of drug therapy. Such information could be useful to establish the relationship between ethnicity and family history of atopy and the development of associated signs and symptoms.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among children attending kindergartens and nurseries. Standardized questionnaires were filled out by parents.
RESULTS: Overall prevalence of AD was 13.4%. Of 384 participants recruited, the highest prevalence was observed in males, Malays, participants younger than 2 years, and those with atopic background such as asthma, hay fever, and family history of atopic diseases. Calamine and white soft paraffin were the preferred choice of nonprescription drugs, whereas topical hydrocortisone seemed to be the preferred choice of prescription drug in the management of AD.
CONCLUSIONS: The overall prevalence is comparable to that reported in the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood Phase One. There is an association between ethnicity and AD prevalence. Topical corticosteroids and emollients are the mainstay of AD management among Malaysians.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of mother-infant rooming-in versus separation on the duration of breastfeeding (exclusive and total duration of breastfeeding).
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 May 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of mother-infant rooming-in versus separate care after hospital birth or at home on the duration of breastfeeding, proportion of breastfeeding at six months and adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion and assessed trial quality. Two review authors extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included one trial (involving 176 women) in this review. This trial included four groups with a factorial design. The factorial design took into account two factors, i.e. infant location in relation to the mother and the type of infant apparel. We combined three of the groups as the intervention (rooming-in) group and the fourth group acted as the control (separate care) and we analysed the results as a single pair-wise comparison. Primary outcomesThe primary outcome, duration of any breastfeeding, was reported by authors as median values because the distribution was found to be skewed. They reported the overall median duration of any breastfeeding to be four months, with no difference found between groups. Duration of exclusive breastfeeding and the proportion of infants being exclusively breastfed at six months of age was not reported in the trial. There was no difference found between the two groups in the proportion of infants receiving any breastfeeding at six months of age (risk ratio (RR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 1.39; one trial; 137 women; low-quality evidence). Secondary outcomesThe mean frequency of breastfeeds per day on day four postpartum for the rooming-in group was 8.3 (standard deviation (SD) 2.2), slightly higher than the separate care group, i.e. seven times per day. However, between-group comparison of this outcome was not appropriate since every infant in the separate care group was breastfed at a fixed schedule of seven times per day (SD = 0) resulting in no estimable comparison. The rate of exclusive breastfeeding on day four postpartum before discharge from hospital was significantly higher in the rooming-in group 86% (99 of 115) compared with separate care group, 45% (17 of 38), (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.34 to 2.76; one trial, 153 women; low-quality evidence). None of our other pre-specified secondary outcomes were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found little evidence to support or refute the practice of rooming-in versus mother-infant separation. Further well-designed RCTs to investigate full mother-infant rooming-in versus partial rooming-in or separate care including all important outcomes are needed.