STUDY DESIGN: A review of articles was performed.
METHODS: A search strategy was used by using electronic bibliographic databases including PubMed, Embase and CENTRAL for published studies and reference list of published studies. The articles were exported to a bibliographic database for further screening process. Two reviewers worked independently to screen results and extract data from the included studies. Any discrepancies were resolved and confirmed by the consensus of all authors.
RESULTS: There were three screening approaches for detecting MCI and dementia - screening by a healthcare provider, screening by a self-administered questionnaire and caretaker informant screening. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was the most common and preferable tool for MCI screening (sensitivity [Sn]: 81-97%; specificity [Sp]: 60-86%), whereas Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE) was the preferable tool for dementia screening (Sn: 79-100%; Sp: 86%).
CONCLUSION: This systematic review found that there are three screening approaches for detecting early dementia and MCI at primary health care. ACE and MoCA are recommended tools for screening of dementia and MCI, respectively.
METHODS: A pragmatic healthcentre-based cluster randomised controlled trial-within trial on 151 post stroke patients from 10 public primary care facilities in Peninsular Malaysia was conducted to evaluate QALY of patients managed with iCaPPS© (n = 86) vs conventional care (n = 65) for 6 months. Costs from societal perspective were calculated, using combination of top down and activity-based costing methods. The 5-level EQ5D (EQ-5D-5 L) was used to calculate health state utility scores. Cost per QALY and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) were determined. Differences within groups were determined using Mann-Whitney tests.
RESULTS: Total costs for 6 months treatment with iCaPPS© was MYR790.34, while conventional care cost MYR527.22. Median QALY for iCaPPS© was 0.55 (0,1.65) compared to conventional care 0.32 (0, 0.73) (z = - 0.21, p = 0.84). Cost per QALY for iCaPPS© was MYR1436.98, conventional care was MYR1647.56. The ICER was MYR1144.00, equivalent to 3.7% of per capita GDP (2012 prices).
CONCLUSIONS: Management of post stroke patients in the community using iCaPPS© costs less per QALY compared to current conventional care and is very cost effective.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial Registration number ACTRN12616001322426. Registered 21 September 2016. (Retrospectively registered).
METHODS: The HomeSat subscale of the Dutch SASC-19 questionnaire (11 items) underwent back-to-back translation to produce a Malay language version. Content validation was done by Family Medicine Specialists involved in community post-stroke care. Community social support services in the original questionnaire were substituted with equivalent local services to ensure contextual relevance. Internal consistency reliability was determined using Cronbach alpha. Exploratory factor analysis was done to validate the factor structure of the Malay version of the questionnaire (SASC10-My™). The SASC10-My™ was then tested on 175 post-stroke patients who were recruited at ten public primary care healthcentres across Peninsular Malaysia, in a trial-within a trial study.
RESULTS: One item from the original Dutch SASC19 (HomeSat) was dropped. Internal consistency for remaining 10 items was high (Cronbach alpha 0.830). Exploratory factor analysis showed the SASC10-My™ had 2 factors: discharge transition and social support services after discharge. The mean total score for SASC10-My™ was 10.74 (SD 7.33). Overall, only 18.2% were satisfied with outpatient stroke care services (SASC10-My™ score ≥ 20). Detailed analysis revealed only 10.9% of respondents were satisfied with discharge transition services, while only 40.9% were satisfied with support services after discharge.
CONCLUSIONS: The SASC10-My™ questionnaire is a reliable and valid tool to measure caregiver or patient satisfaction with outpatient stroke care services in the Malaysian healthcare setting. Studies linking discharge protocol patterns and satisfaction with outpatient stroke care services should be conducted to improve care delivery and longer-term outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: No.: ACTRN12616001322426 (Registration Date: 21st September 2016.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to March 2018; data on patients' sociodemographic characteristics, diabetes knowledge, perceived social support and health literacy level were collected. Health literacy level was measured using the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q47).
SETTING: Patients were recruited from four primary care clinics in Perak, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients diagnosed with T2DM who attended the study clinics during the study period.
PRIMARY OUTCOME VARIABLE: Patients with HLS-EU-Q47 General Index of ≤33 points were classified as having limited health literacy.
RESULTS: The prevalence of limited health literacy was 65.3% (n=279). In bivariate analysis, patients' ethnicity (p=0.04), highest education level (p<0.001), monthly income (p=0.003), having health insurance (p=0.007), English language fluency (p<0.001), Malay language fluency (p=0.021), attending diabetes education sessions (p<0.001), perceived social support (p<0.001) and diabetes knowledge (p=0.019) were factors associated with limited health literacy. In logistic regression, not being fluent in English was associated with limited health literacy (OR=2.36, 95% CI 1.30 to 4.30) whereas having high perceived social support (OR=0.52, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.69) and having attended diabetes education sessions (OR=0.42, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.68) were associated with adequate health literacy.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of limited health literacy is high among patients with T2DM in Perak, Malaysia. Strategies to improve health literacy in these patients must consider the influences of English fluency, attendance at diabetes education sessions and social support, and may need to adopt a universal approach to addressing limited health literacy.
Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 329 GPs and 548 pharmacists was conducted from May to November 2019. Participants answered a questionnaire focused on their i) current practice in the management of AR, ii) views on patient compliance, iii) understanding and usage of guidelines.
Results: Clinical history was the most preferred method to diagnose AR by 95.4% of GPs and 58.8% of pharmacists. Second-generation antihistamines were the most widely available treatment option in GP clinics and pharmacies (94.8% and 97.2%) and correspondingly the most preferred treatment for both mild (90.3%, 76.8%) to moderatesevere rhinitis (90.3%, 78.6%) by GPs and pharmacists, respectively. Loratadine was ranked as the most preferred 2nd generation antihistamines (GP vs pharmacists: 55.3% vs 58.9%). More than 90% of GPs and pharmacists ranked length and efficacy of treatment as important factors that increase patient compliance. Awareness of the ARIA guidelines was high among GPs (80%) and lower among pharmacists (48.4%). However, only 63.3% of GPs and 48.2% of pharmacists knew how to identify AR patients.
Conclusions: The survey in the 4 ASEAN countries has identified a need to strengthen the awareness and use of ARIA guidelines among the primary care practitioners. Adherence to ARIA guidelines, choosing the appropriate treatment option and prioritizing factors that increases patient compliance may contribute to better management outcomes of AR at the primary care practice.
Methods: The development phase consists of both literature and expert panel review. The validation phase consists of content validity, face validity, and construct validity. Cronbach's alpha was used to verify internal consistency. The development phase produced a questionnaire with 3 domains: perception, attitude, and practice consisting of 60 items (PAP-PCP questionnaire). Item response theory analysis for perception demonstrated the difficulty and discrimination values were acceptable except for 3 items. Exploratory factor analysis for attitude and practice domains showed the psychometric properties were good except for 3 items in practice domain. Experts judgement was used to decide on the final selection of questionnaire which consists of 59 items.
Results: The final validated questionnaire has 3 domains with 59 items. All domains had Cronbach's alpha above 0.65 which was reliable. 302 physicians completed the questionnaire. 98% PCPs diagnosed AR based on clinical history. Although, majority agree AR guidelines is useful (67%), they had difficulty in using it to classify AR (54.9%) and determine AR severity (73.9%). Oral anti-histamines (first and second generation) were the most prescribed (>75%) followed by intranasal corticosteroids (59%) and combined intranasal corticosteroid and oral anti-histamine (51%). Majority agreed that treatment efficacy (81.8%), adverse effects (83.8%), fear of adverse effects (73.5%), route of administration (69.4%), dosing frequency (72.5%), taste (64.6%) and cost (73.5%) affect treatment compliance.
Conclusions: The newly developed and validated questionnaire is a promising instrument in understanding the treatment gap in AR. Although further testing and refinement are needed, it provides an initial means for evaluating knowledge and understanding of PCPs in treating AR.