Methods: An online survey was conducted among healthcare providers across public health clinics in Malaysia. All family medicine specialists, medical officers, nurses and assistant medical officers involved in the screening program for adult men were invited to answer a 51-item questionnaire via email or WhatsApp. The questionnaire comprised five sections: participants' socio-demographic information, current screening practices, barriers and facilitators to using the screening tool, and views on the content and format of the screening tool.
Results: A total of 231 healthcare providers from 129 health clinics participated in this survey. Among them, 37.44% perceived the implementation of the screening program as a "top-down decision." Although 37.44% found the screening tool for adult men "useful," some felt that it was "time consuming" to fill out (38.2%) and "lengthy" (28.3%). In addition, 'adult men refuse to answer' (24.1%) was cited as the most common patient-related barrier.
Conclusions: This study provided useful insights into the challenges encountered by the public healthcare providers when implementing a national screening program for men. The screening tool for adult men should be revised to make it more user-friendly. Further studies should explore the reasons why men were reluctant to participate in health screenings, thus enhancing the implementation of screening programs in primary care.
METHOD: According to the reported practice address in 2018, the spatial distribution of health care facilities was mapped and explored using the GIS mapping techniques. The density of health care facilities was analyzed using thematic maps with hot spot analysis. Population to facility ratio was calculated using the projection of the population growth based on 2010 census data, which was the latest available in the year of analysis.
RESULTS: The study included geographical mapping of 7051 general practitioner clinics (GPC), 3084 community pharmacies (CP), 139 public general hospitals (GHs) and 990 public primary health clinics (PHC). The health care facilities were found to be highly dense in urban areas than in the rural ones. There were six districts that had no CP, 2 had no GPC, and 11 did not have both. The overall ratio of GPC, CP, GH, and PHC to the population was 1:4228, 1:10,200, 1:223,619 and 1:31,397, respectively. Should the coverage for minor ailment services in public health care clinics be extended to community pharmacies, the ratio of facilities to population for each district would be better with 1:4000-8000.
CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of health care facilities for minor ailment management in Malaysia is relatively good. However, if the scheme for minor ailments were available to community pharmacies, then the patients' access to minor ailments services would be further improved.
DESIGN: Qualitative content analysis on all textbooks used in Malaysian public schools in the year 2019 were conducted to identify the content and structure of information delivery through 11 years of formal education. Information related to hearing health was extracted and categorised according to the themes that emerged. Further analysis was done to characterise the usefulness of the information in promoting active hearing care based on the type of information delivered.
STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 148 elementary and secondary school textbooks were reviewed.
RESULTS: Fourteen textbooks (4 elementary and 10 secondary levels) were found to have relevant hearing health information covering topics of sound, ear and hearing, noise and hearing loss. The contents were mostly theoretical and lacked information about noise-induced hearing loss and proper hearing care.
CONCLUSION: Minimal hearing health information was present in the Malaysian school curriculum. The content was inadequate for teaching students about hearing loss prevention. Areas of improvement and research are recommended to improve school-based hearing health education in Malaysia.