MyMedR

Displaying publications 21 - 26 of 26 in total

Abstract:

Sort:

Reducing medical errors in primary care using a pPragmatic complex intervention

Khoo EM, Sararaks S, Lee WK, Liew SM, Cheong AT, Abdul Samad A, et al.

Asia Pac J Public Health, 2015 Sep;27(6):670-7.
PMID: 25563351 DOI: 10.1177/1010539514564007

This study aimed to develop an intervention to reduce medical errors and to determine if the intervention can reduce medical errors in public funded primary care clinics. A controlled interventional trial was conducted in 12 conveniently selected primary care clinics. Random samples of outpatient medical records were selected and reviewed by family physicians for documentation, diagnostic, and management errors at baseline and 3 months post intervention. The intervention package comprised educational training, structured process change, review methods, and patient education. A significant reduction was found in overall documentation error rates between intervention (Pre 98.3% [CI 97.1-99.6]; Post 76.1% [CI 68.1-84.1]) and control groups (Pre 97.4% [CI 95.1-99.8]; Post 89.5% [85.3-93.6]). Within the intervention group, overall management errors reduced from 54.0% (CI 49.9-58.0) to 36.6% (CI 30.2-43.1) and medication error from 43.2% (CI 39.2-47.1) to 25.2% (CI 19.9-30.5). This low-cost intervention was useful to reduce medical errors in resource-constrained settings.
Fulltext Research funding impact and priority setting - advancing universal access and quality healthcare research in Malaysia

Fun WH, Sararaks S, Tan EH, Tang KF, Chong DWQ, Low LL, et al.

BMC Health Serv Res, 2019 Apr 24;19(1):248.
PMID: 31018843 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4072-7

BACKGROUND: Health Research Priority Setting (HRPS) in the Ministry of Health (MOH) Malaysia was initiated more than a decade ago to drive effort toward research for informed decision and policy-making. This study assessed the impact of funded prioritised research and identified research gaps to inform future priority setting initiatives for universal access and quality healthcare in Malaysia.
METHODS: Research impact of universal access and quality healthcare projects funded by the National Institutes of Health Malaysia were assessed based on the modified Payback Framework, addressing categories of informing policy, knowledge production, and benefits to health and health sector. For the HRPS process, the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative methodology was adapted and adopted, with the incorporation of stakeholder values using weights and monetary allocation survey. Workshop discussions and interviews with stakeholders and research groups were conducted to identify research gaps, with the use of conceptual frameworks to guide the search.
RESULTS: Seventeen ongoing and 50 completed projects were identified for research funding impact analysis. Overall, research fund allocation differed from stakeholders' expectation. For research impact, 48 out of 50 completed projects (96.0%) contributed to some form of policy-making efforts. Almost all completed projects resulted in outputs that contributed to knowledge production and were expected to lead to health and health sector benefits. The HRPS process led to the identification of research priority areas that stemmed from ongoing and new issues identified for universal access and quality healthcare.
CONCLUSION: The concerted efforts of evaluation of research funding impact, prioritisation, dissemination and policy-maker involvement were valuable for optimal health research resource utilisation in a resource constrained developing country. Embedding impact evaluation into a priority setting process and funding research based on national needs could facilitate health research investment to reach its potential.
Fulltext Socio-Economic Factors Related to Drinking Water Source and Sanitation in Malaysia

Kong YL, Anis-Syakira J, Fun WH, Balqis-Ali NZ, Shakirah MS, Sararaks S

Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020 10 29;17(21).
PMID: 33137998 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17217933

Access to improved water and sanitation is essential. We describe these practices in Malaysia using data from a nationwide community survey and used logistic regression to assess the determinants. Of the 7978 living quarters (LQs), 58.3% were in urban areas. About 2.4%, 0.5% and 27.4% of LQs had non-improved water sources, non-improved toilet types and improper domestic waste disposal, respectively. Open burning was practiced by 26.1%. Water source was a problem for long houses (10.5%), squatters (8.5%) and shared houses (4.0%). Non-improved toilet types were 11.9% for squatters and 4.8% for shared houses. Improper domestic waste disposal practices were higher for occupants of village houses (64.2%), long houses (54.4%), single houses (45.8%) and squatters (35.6%). An increase in education or income level was associated with a decrease in improper domestic waste disposal methods. House type significantly affected water and sanitation after adjusting for the effects of other variables. Lower household income was associated with non-improved toilet types and improper domestic waste disposal. Lower education and rural location influenced domestic waste disposal. The water and toilet facilities in Malaysia were generally good, while domestic waste management practices could be improved. There remain pockets of communities with environmental challenges for the nation.
Fulltext Study protocol for a mixed methods approach to optimize colorectal cancer screening in Malaysia: Integrating stakeholders insights and knowledge-to-action framework

Chong DW, Jayaraj VJ, Ab Rahim FI, Syed Soffian SS, Azmi MF, Mohd Yusri MY, et al.

PLoS One, 2024;19(4):e0299659.
PMID: 38593177 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299659

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer is a growing global health concern and the number of reported cases has increased over the years. Early detection through screening is critical to improve outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer. In Malaysia, there is an urgent need to optimize the colorectal cancer screening program as uptake is limited by multiple challenges. This study aims to systematically identify and address gaps in screening service delivery to optimize the Malaysian colorectal cancer screening program.
METHODS: This study uses a mixed methods design. It focuses primarily on qualitative data to understand processes and strategies and to identify specific areas that can be improved through stakeholder engagement in the screening program. Quantitative data play a dual role in supporting the selection of participants for the qualitative study based on program monitoring data and assessing inequalities in screening and program implementation in healthcare facilities in Malaysia. Meanwhile, literature review identifies existing strategies to improve colorectal cancer screening. Additionally, the knowledge-to-action framework is integrated to ensure that the research findings lead to practical improvements to the colorectal cancer screening program.
DISCUSSION: Through this complex mix of qualitative and quantitative methods, this study will explore the complex interplay of population- and systems-level factors that influence screening rates. It involves identifying barriers to effective colorectal cancer screening in Malaysia, comparing current strategies with international best practices, and providing evidence-based recommendations to improve the local screening program.
Fulltext The impact of a prescription review and prescriber feedback system on prescribing practices in primary care clinics: a cluster randomised trial

Lim WY, Hss AS, Ng LM, John Jasudass SR, Sararaks S, Vengadasalam P, et al.

BMC Fam Pract, 2018 07 19;19(1):120.
PMID: 30025534 DOI: 10.1186/s12875-018-0808-4

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured prescription review and prescriber feedback program in reducing prescribing errors in government primary care clinics within an administrative region in Malaysia.

METHODS: This was a three group, pragmatic, cluster randomised trial. In phase 1, we randomised 51 clinics to a full intervention group (prescription review and league tables plus authorised feedback letter), a partial intervention group (prescription review and league tables), and a control group (prescription review only). Prescribers in these clinics were the target of our intervention. Prescription reviews were performed by pharmacists; 20 handwritten prescriptions per prescriber were consecutively screened on a random day each month, and errors identified were recorded in a standardised data collection form. Prescribing performance feedback was conducted at the completion of each prescription review cycle. League tables benchmark prescribing errors across clinics and individual prescribers, while the authorised feedback letter detailed prescribing performance based on a rating scale. In phase 2, all clinics received the full intervention. Pharmacists were trained on data collection, and all data were audited by researchers as an implementation fidelity strategy. The primary outcome, percentage of prescriptions with at least one error, was displayed in p-charts to enable group comparison.

RESULTS: A total of 32,200 prescriptions were reviewed. In the full intervention group, error reduction occurred gradually and was sustained throughout the 8-month study period. The process mean error rate of 40.7% (95% CI 27.4, 29.5%) in phase 1 reduced to 28.4% (95% CI 27.4, 29.5%) in phase 2. In the partial intervention group, error reduction was not well sustained and showed a seasonal pattern with larger process variability. The phase 1 error rate averaging 57.9% (95% CI 56.5, 59.3%) reduced to 44.8% (95% CI 43.3, 46.4%) in phase 2. There was no evidence of improvement in the control group, with phase 1 and phase 2 error rates averaging 41.1% (95% CI 39.6, 42.6%) and 39.3% (95% CI 37.8, 40.9%) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: The rate of prescribing errors in primary care settings is high, and routine prescriber feedback comprising league tables and a feedback letter can effectively reduce prescribing errors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: National Medical Research Register: NMRR-12-108-11,289 (5th March 2012).
Fulltext Validity and reliability of the SF-36: the Malaysian context

Sararaks S, Azman AB, Low LL, Rugayah B, Aziah AM, Hooi LN, et al.

Med J Malaysia, 2005 Jun;60(2):163-79.
PMID: 16114157

Results of construct validity and reliability of the SF-36 are described, based on data from a multi-centre study on asthmatics and a population based survey. Questionnaire refinement was carried out between the two studies. Quality of data was good, with all items having less than 0.5% missing values. Floor and/or ceiling effects were observed for REE, REP, PF and SF. For scaling assumptions, correlations between each items and its hypothesized scale were all above 0.50, except for one item in PF. and for both items in SF. Item discriminant validity was an issue for items in VT, SF and MH scales. Cronbach's as for all scales exceeded the recommended 0.70 level, except for SF. Only one latent dimension was identified in principal component analysis, and only 52-53% of variance accounted for. As expected, PF shows high correlations with the physical component while MH was highly correlated with the mental component. Contrasting findings in the loadings of other scales were observed in the asthma data. Age, disease severity and presence of self-reported handicap/disability significantly affect PF, while MH demonstrates no obvious pattern with declining age. In essence, the Malay version of SF-36 could be used in Malaysia, with its generally acceptable internal consistency and validity. The caveat is in the call for additional domains of importance to Malaysians that is not covered by the instrument, and in the caution to be employed when using and construing the instrument.