METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, and single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted at the University Malaya Medical Centre. Patients older than 65 years presenting to the hospital emergency department or geriatric clinic with 1 injurious fall or 2 falls in the past year and with impaired functional mobility were included in the study. The intervention group received a modified OEP intervention (n = 34) for 3 months, while the control group received conventional care (n = 33). All participants were assessed at baseline and 6 months.

RESULTS: Twenty-four participants in both OEP and control groups completed the 6-month follow-up assessments. Within-group analyses revealed no difference in grip strength in the OEP group (P = 1.00, right hand; P = .55, left hand), with significant deterioration in grip strength in the control group (P = .01, right hand; P = .005, left hand). Change in grip strength over 6 months significantly favored the OEP group (P = .047, right hand; P = .004, left hand). Significant improvements were also observed in mobility and balance in the OEP group.

AIMS AND METHODS: A randomised controlled, non-blinded, cross-over study involving 38 patients (with colostomies and ileostomies) compared the test device to a similar device from the same manufacturer but without the tape border. The main objective was to assess wear time for non-inferiority as a measure of efficacy. Secondary efficacy assessment included peristomal skin condition using the DET (discolouration, erosion and tissue growth) score and patient acceptability, which was assessed through questionnaires using Likert-scale options. Safety was assessed according to the incidence and intensity of device-related adverse events, and the condition of the peristomal skin.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Delphi consensus technique was conducted online to review and evaluate the framework module. A panel of experts, including rehabilitation medicine physicians, occupational therapists, and clinical psychologists in Malaysia, was invited to participate in this study. For each round, the expert consensus was defined as more than 90% of the expert panel agreeing or strongly agreeing with the proposed items.

RESULTS: A total of 33 practitioners completed the three Delphi rounds. 72.7% of the expert panel have been practising in their relevant clinical fields for more than six years (M = 10.67, SD = 5.68). In Round 1, 23% of the experts suggested that the framework module for attention training required further improvements, specifically in the language (M = 1.97, SD = 0.75) and instructions (M = 2.03, SD = 0.71) provided. In Round 2, 15% of the experts recommended additional changes in the instruction (M = 2.15, SD = 0.67) for attention training. Amendments made to the framework module in line with the recommendations provided by the experts resulted in a higher level of consensus, as 94% to 100% of the experts in Round 3 concluded the framework module was suitable and comprehensive for our breast cancer survivors. Following the key results, the objectives were practical, and the proposed approaches, strategies, and techniques for attention and memory training were feasible. The clarity of the instructions, procedures, verbatim transcripts, and timeframe further enhanced the efficacy and utility of the framework module.

METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted among pre-clinical medical and dental students using convenience sampling. Questions regarding sociodemographic profile and responses to the Smartphone Addiction Scale Short Version (SAS-SV) and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Score questionnaire (DASS-21) were collected. Multiple logistic regression testing was used to analyse the factors associated with smartphone addiction.

RESULTS: We invited 409 pre-clinical medical and dental students to participate voluntarily, resulting in a response rate of 80.2%. The prevalence of high-risk smartphone addiction among the participants was 47.9%. Male participants, participants who used smartphones mainly for social media, and participants with depressive symptoms were more likely to have a high risk of smartphone addiction. Medical students, participants who spent less than 3 hours per day on a smartphone, and participants who used smartphones for education-related activities were less likely to have a high risk of smartphone addiction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred patients were randomly recruited and then further randomly divided into two groups of 50 patients each. The first group used the POC PCT test along with the standard sepsis parameter monitoring, while the second group had the standard monitoring only (C-reactive protein [CRP] level, total white count, temperature and tracheal aspirate culture). Serial PCT test results and CRP levels were monitored on days 1, 3, 7 and 9. The patients were followed up for 28-day mortality.

RESULTS: Eighty-five patients completed the trial, of whom 43 were in the PCT group and 42 were in the control group. The PCT group had a significantly lower mean (SD) antibiotic treatment duration (10.28 [2.68] days) than the control group (11.52 [3.06]). The mean (SD) difference was -1.25 (95% confidence interval [CI], -2.48 to 0.01; t-statistic [df] = -1.997 [83]; P = 0.049). The PCT group also had a higher number of antibiotic-free days alive during the 28 days after VAP onset than the control group (mean [SD], 10.79 [7.61] vs. 8.72 [6.41]). The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was the sole factor for the decrease in duration after VAP onset (regression coefficient β [95% CI], -0.70 [-1.19 to -0.20]; P = 0.006).

METHODS: The prospective clinical study was conducted at Selayang Hospital (SH) and Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz (HCTM) within one year. A total of 38 children ranging from 3 to 18 years old underwent hearing evaluation using ABR tests and MSSR under sedation. The duration of both tests were then compared.

RESULTS: The estimated hearing threshold of frequency specific chirp MSSR showed good correlation with ABR especially in higher frequencies such as 2000 Hz and 4000Hz with the value of cronbach alpha of 0.890, 0.933, 0.970 and 0.969 on 500Hz, 1000Hz, 2000Hz and 4000Hz. The sensitivity of MSSR is 0.786, 0.75, 0.957 and 0.889 and specificity is 0.85, 0.882, 0.979 and 0.966 over 500Hz, 1000Hz, 2000Hz and 4000Hz. The duration of MSSR tests were shorter than ABR tests in normal hearing children with an average of 35.3 minutes for MSSR tests and 46.4 minutes for ABR tests. This can also be seen in children with hearing loss where the average duration for MSSR tests is 40.0 minutes and 52.0 minutes for ABR tests.