METHODS: A total of 15 femora were examined with four parameters i.e. maximum length of femur (FeMl), diameter of femoral head (FeHd), transverse diameter of midshaft (FeMd) and condylar breadth (FeCb). Osteometric board and vernier calipers were employed for the conventional method, while CT reconstructed images and Osirix MD software was utilised for the virtual method.
RESULTS: Results exhibited that there were no significant differences in the measurements by conventional and virtual methods. There were also no significant differences in the measurements by the intra or inter-observer error analyses. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were more than 0.95 by both intra and inter-observer error analyses. Technical error of measurement had displayed values within the acceptable ranges (rTEM <0.08 for intra-observer, <2.25 for inter-observer), and coefficient of reliability (R) indicated small measurement errors (R > 0.95 for intra-observer, R > 0.92 for inter-observer). By parameters, FeMl showed the highest R value (0.99) with the least error in different methods and observers (rTEM = 0.02-0.41%). Bland and Altman plots revealed points scattered close to zero indicating perfect agreement by both virtual and conventional methods. The mean differences for FeMl, FeHd, FeMd and FeCb measurements were 0.01 cm, -0.01 cm, 0.02 cm and 0.01 cm, respectively.
CONCLUSION: This brought to suggest that bone measurement by virtual method was highly accurate and reliable as in the conventional method. It is recommended for implementation in the future anthropological studies especially in countries with limited skeletal collection.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity and reliability of the PPCI for physicians in Malaysia.
SETTING: An urban tertiary hospital in Malaysia.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from June to August 2014. Doctors were grouped as either a "collaborator" or a "non-collaborator". Collaborators were doctors who regularly worked with one particular clinical pharmacist in their ward, while non-collaborators were doctors who interacted with any random pharmacist who answered the general pharmacy telephone line whenever they required assistance on medication-related enquiries, as they did not have a clinical pharmacist in their ward. Collaborators were firstly identified by the clinical pharmacist he/she worked with, then invited to participate in this study through email, as it was difficult to locate and approach them personally. Non-collaborators were sampled conveniently by approaching them in person as these doctors could be easily sampled from any wards without a clinical pharmacist. The PPCI for physicians was administered at baseline and 2 weeks later.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Validity (face validity, factor analysis and discriminative validity) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) of the PPCI for physicians.
RESULTS: A total of 116 doctors (18 collaborators and 98 non-collaborators) were recruited. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the PPCI for physicians was a 3-factor model. The correlation of the mean domain scores ranged from 0.711 to 0.787. "Collaborators" had significantly higher scores compared to "non-collaborators" (81.4 ± 10.1 vs. 69.3 ± 12.1, p < 0.001). The Cronbach alpha for the overall PPCI for physicians was 0.949, while the Cronbach alpha values for the individual domains ranged from 0.877 to 0.926. Kappa values at test-retest ranged from 0.553 to 0.752.
CONCLUSION: The PPCI for physicians was a valid and reliable measure in determining doctors' views about collaborative working relationship with pharmacists, in Malaysia.
METHODS: A hybrid model of a decision tree and Markov model was developed to evaluate 3 strategies for treating newly diagnosed epilepsy among adults: (i) CBZ initiation without HLA-B*15:02 screening (current practice); (ii) universal HLA-B*15:02 screening prior to CBZ initiation; and (iii) alternative prescribing without HLA-B*15:02 screening. The model was populated with real-world inputs derived from the Malaysian population. From a societal perspective, base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses estimated the costs and outcomes over a lifetime. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated.
RESULTS: In the base-cases analysis, universal HLA-B*15:02 screening yielded the lowest total costs and the highest total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Compared with current practice, universal screening was less costly by USD100 and more effective by QALYs increase of 0.1306, while alternative prescribing resulted in 0.1383 QALYs loss at additional costs of USD332. The highest seizure remission rate (56%) was estimated for universal HLA-B*15:02 screening vs. current practice (54%) and alternative prescribing (48%).
CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that universal HLA-B*15:02 screening is a cost-effective intervention in Malaysia. With the demonstrated value of real-world evidence in economic evaluations, more relevant standardization efforts should be emphasized to better inform decision-making.