MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire based on the study aims and previous literature was developed by the authors and mailed to all currently registered GPs in private clinics in Penang. Survey responses were analysed using SSPS version 21.
RESULTS: From a total of 386 questionnaires distributed, 112 (29%) were returned. Half of the respondents were unaware of the existence of any CPG for depression. One quarter reported not managing depression at all, while one third used anxiolytic monotherapy in moderate-severe depression. Almost 75 % of respondents reported making referrals to specialist psychiatric services for moderate-severe depression. Time constraints, patient non-adherence and a lack of depression management skills were perceived as the main barriers to depression care.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the need to engage privately practising primary care physicians in Malaysia to improve their skills in the management of depression. Future revisions of the Malaysian Depression CPG should directly involve more GPs from private practices at the planning, development and implementation stages, in order to increase its impact.
METHODS: Medical claims records from February 2019 to February 2020 were extracted from a health insurance claims database. Data cleaning and data analysis were performed using Python 3.7 with the Pandas, NumPy and Matplotlib libraries. The top five most common diagnoses were identified, and for each diagnosis, the most common medication classes and medications prescribed were quantified. Potentially inappropriate prescribing practices were identified by comparing the medications prescribed with relevant clinical guidelines.
KEY FINDINGS: The five most common diagnoses were upper respiratory tract infection (41.5%), diarrhoea (7.7%), musculoskeletal pain (7.6%), headache (6.7%) and gastritis (4.0%). Medications prescribed by general practitioners were largely as expected for symptomatic management of the respective conditions. One area of potentially inappropriate prescribing identified was inappropriate antibiotic choice. Same-class polypharmacy that may lead to an increased risk of adverse events were also identified, primarily involving multiple paracetamol-containing products, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antihistamines. Other areas of non-adherence to guidelines identified included the potential overuse of oral corticosteroids and oral salbutamol, and inappropriate gastroprotection for patients receiving NSAIDs.
CONCLUSIONS: While prescribing practices are generally appropriate within the private primary care sector, there remain several areas where some potentially inappropriate prescribing occurs. The areas identified should be the focus in continuing efforts to improve prescribing practices to obtain the optimal clinical outcomes while reducing unnecessary risks and healthcare costs.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective telephonic structured interview-based study was carried out on all orthopaedic patients taking DAMA during a one-year period from July 2016 to June 2017. They were telephonically interviewed with a structured questionnaire. Hospital and ED records were analysed for demographic as well as temporal characteristics.
Results: A total of 68 orthopaedic patients walked out of casualty against medical advice out of a total 775 (8.77%) orthopaedic patients presenting during the period as against 6.4% overall rate of DAMA for all specialties. The main reasons for DAMA were financial unaffordability of treatment (36.7%), preference for another orthopaedic surgeon (22%) and on advice of the patient's General Practitioner (16.1%).
Conclusion: Unaffordability of treatment is a significant cause for walkouts amongst orthopaedic patients. Private hospitals need to recognise and implement processes by which these patients can be treated at affordable costs and with coverage either by medical insurance or robust charity programs. Patient education and awareness are important to encourage them to have insurance coverage.
Case Report: Madam Tan, a 71-year-old Malaysian Chinese lady, otherwise healthy, presented to her local GP with a complaint of a nodule over the left cheek that had been there for more than a decade. Her concern was that the lesion was growing and had become conspicuous. She had spent most of her life as a farmer working in her orchard.Upon examination, she had an obvious dome-shaped nodule over the left cheek measuring approximately 1.8 cm in diameter. The lesion was firm, pigmented, well-demarcated, and slightly ulcerated at the top. Clinically, she was diagnosed with a pigmented nodular basal cell carcinoma of the left cheek. Examination of the systems was unremarkable.She requested that the consulting GP remove the growth. The cost for specialist treatment and waiting time at the local hospital were her concerns.
Clinical Questions: Can the basal cell skin cancer be excised safely and effectively in the local primary care setting? What are the crucial preoperative concerns?
DESIGN: A 2 × 2 factorial, repeated-measures, open-label, randomized clinical trial.
SETTINGS: General medical practice offices in Muar, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Opioid-dependent individuals (n = 234).
INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions and received study interventions for 24 weeks: (1) physician management with or without behavioral counseling and (2) physician management with or without abstinence-contingent buprenorphine-naloxone (ACB) take-home doses.
MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcomes were proportions of opioid-negative urine tests and HIV risk behaviors [assessed by audio computer-assisted AIDS risk inventory (ACASI-ARI)].
FINDINGS: The rates of opioid-negative urine tests over 24 weeks of treatment were significantly higher with [68.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 65-71] than without behavioral counseling (59.2%, 95% CI = 56-62, P