METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design and convenient sampling, data were collected in public areas within Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, via face-to-face interview with a structured questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the significant predictors of patients' confidence in ADR reporting.
RESULTS: Out of 860 consented respondents achieving a response rate of 73.5%, only 69 (8%) were aware of the Malaysian ADR monitoring system. The majority (60%) of the respondents indicated they had the confidence to report ADRs. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that ease in completing the ADR reporting form was the strongest variable predictive of confidence to report ADRs (odds ratio [OR], 18.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.55-32.25). Increased confidence in ADR reporting was also associated with education level. Respondents with a higher education level were more likely to be confident to report ADRs compared to those with primary or no formal education (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 0.77-8.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Lack of awareness of the ADR monitoring system is still prevalent among Malaysian patients. The ease of completing the ADR form and education level are predictive of patient confidence to report ADRs. These factors should be considered in designing public promotional activities to encourage patient contributions to pharmacovigilance.
METHODS: Using data from a random population sample of noninstitutionalized Chinese, Malay, and Indian older adults 60 years old and older in Singapore (N = 1072), we modeled the dimensional structure of the 8-item IADL Scale using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and assessed its convergent and divergent validity using known group differences and strengths of association.
RESULTS: Factor analyses yielded two strong and reliable factors representing underlying physical and cognitive dimensions of IADL. The validity of the model was supported by the pattern of associations of the IADL with age, gender, education, self-reported health status, hospitalization, physical comorbidities, dementia and depression, and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. Notably, cognitive IADL showed a greater total effect on MMSE cognitive performance score than did physical IADL, with the effect of physical IADL on MMSE score mostly explained by cognitive IADL. Reasonably good cross-cultural validity was demonstrated among Chinese, Malays, and Indians, with strongest validity for Indians.
CONCLUSION: The eight-item IADL Scale has physical and cognitive domains and is cross-culturally applicable. The cognitive IADL domain taps a set of activities directly related to cognitive functioning.