METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted among patients and primary care trainees (known henceforth as doctors). Patients aged ≥ 60 years, having ≥ 1 chronic disease and prescribed ≥ 5 medications and could communicate in either English or Malay were recruited. Doctors and patients were purposively sampled based on their stage of training as family medicine specialists and ethnicity, respectively. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic approach was used to analyse data.
RESULTS: Twenty-four in-depth interviews (IDIs) with patients and four focus group discussions (FGDs) with 23 doctors were conducted. Four themes emerged: understanding the concept of deprescribing, the necessity to perform deprescribing, concerns regarding deprescribing and factors influencing deprescribing. Patients were receptive to the idea of deprescribing when the term was explained to them, whilst doctors had a good understanding of deprescribing. Both patients and doctors would deprescribe when the necessity outweighed their concerns. Factors that influenced deprescribing were doctor-patient rapport, health literacy among patients, external influences from carers and social media, and system challenges.
CONCLUSION: Deprescribing was deemed necessary by both patients and doctors when there was a reason to do so. However, both doctors and patients were afraid to deprescribe as they 'didn't want to rock the boat'. Early-career doctors were reluctant to deprescribe as they felt compelled to continue medications that were initiated by another specialist. Doctors requested more training on how to deprescribe medications.
METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental controlled study conducted in 20 intervention and 20 control public primary care clinics in Malaysia from November 2016 to June 2019. Type 2 diabetes patients aged 30 years and above were selected via systematic random sampling. Outcomes include process of care and intermediate clinical outcomes. Difference-in-differences analyses was conducted.
RESULTS: We reviewed 12,017 medical records of patients with type 2 diabetes. Seven process of care measures improved: HbA1c tests (odds ratio (OR) 3.31, 95% CI 2.13, 5.13); lipid test (OR 4.59, 95% CI 2.64, 7.97), LDL (OR 4.33, 95% CI 2.16, 8.70), and urine albumin (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.12, 3.55) tests; BMI measured (OR 15.80, 95% CI 4.78, 52.24); cardiovascular risk assessment (OR 174.65, 95% CI 16.84, 1810.80); and exercise counselling (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04, 1.33). We found no statistically significant changes in intermediate clinical outcomes (i.e. HbA1c, LDL, HDL and BP control).
CONCLUSIONS: EnPHC interventions was successful in enhancing the quality of care, in terms of process of care, by changing healthcare providers behaviour.
METHODS: A qualitative descriptive research study using in-depth semi-structured interviews was conducted with Year 3 medical students and patients to study their experiences at a primary care clinic, over two weeks. Data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using Braun and Clark's thematic analysis. Both students' and patients' views on communication skills were obtained.
RESULTS: Three themes were established based on student-patient communication in primary care settings: socio-cultural elements in student-patient communication; cognitive and emotional challenges for effective communication; and enablers for effective student-patient communication. The themes and sub-themes describe both students and patients valuing each other as individuals with socio-cultural beliefs and needs.
CONCLUSION: The findings can be used to structure new approaches to communication skills education that is patient-centred, culturally sensitive, and informed by patients. Communication skills training should encourage students to prioritise and reflect more on patient perspectives while educators should engage patients to inform and assess the outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study involved five public healthcare clinics in the Kuching district with indepth interviews (IDI) conducted on 14 primary care doctors (PCDs). Semi-structured interviews and in-depth discussions were conducted via videoconferencing. One representative was selected from each clinic at initiation, followed by snowball method for subsequent subject selection until saturation of themes. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and analysis based on framework analysis principles via NVivo software. Themes were analysed deductively according to study objectives and evidence from literature.
RESULTS: Three main themes emerged from the IDI: (1) The perception of depression in elderly patients, (2) The perceived barriers to screening, and (3) The screening processes. Majority of the PCDs perceived depression as part of ageing process. Time constraints, lack of privacy in consultation rooms, dominant caregivers and failure to recognise recurrent somatic symptoms as part of depression influenced PCDs decision to screen. Screening was technically challenging for PCDs to use the DASS-21, which was not socio-culturally validated for local native population. Only 21.4% of respondents (3/14) reported screening at least three out 10 elderly patients seen over 1- month period. During the covid pandemic, due to the same human resource support and practices, most participants thought their screening for depression in elderlies had not changed.
CONCLUSION: Awareness of depression among PCDs needs to be re-enforced via continuous medical education programs to use appropriate screening tools, address infrastructure related barriers to optimise screening practices. The use of appropriate locally validated and socio-culturally adapted tool is vital to correctly interpret the screening test for patients.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study from 4 primary care clinics where 240 patients aged >60 years and their caregivers were enrolled. Patients were assigned to a nurse or a health care assistant (HCA) for 2 separate PFFS-M assessments administered by HCPs of the same profession, as well as by a doctor during the first visit (inter-rater reliability). Patients were also administered the Self-Assessed Report of Personal Capacity & Healthy Ageing (SEARCH) tool, a 40-item frailty index, by a research officer. The correlation between patients' PFFS-M scores and SEARCH tool scores determined convergent validity. Patients returned 1 week later for PFFS-M reassessment by the same HCPs (test-retest reliability). Caregivers completed the PFFS-M for the patient at both clinic visits. Classification cut-points for the PFFS-M were derived against frailty categories defined through the SEARCH tool.
RESULTS: The inter-rater (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.92 [95% CI, 0.90-0.93)] and test-retest (ICC = 0.94 [95% CI, 0.92-0.95]) reliability between all raters was excellent, including by patients' education levels. The convergent validity was moderate (r = 0.637, p < 0.001), including for varying educational background. PFFS-M categories were identified as: 0-3, no frailty; 4-5, at risk of frailty; 6-8, mild frailty; 9-12, moderate frailty; and >13, severe frailty.
CONCLUSION: PFFS-M is a reliable and valid tool with frailty severity scores now established for use of this tool in primary care clinics.
METHOD: In December 2022, a scoping review was conducted using PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and a manual search, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. We used articles that have been written in English, and relevant articles were then screened, duplicates were removed, eligibility criteria were applied, and studies that met the criteria were reviewed. The keywords challenges, management, sarcopenia, and primary care were included.
RESULT: The initial search generated 280 publications, and 11 articles were included after inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review. In this review, challenges in the management of sarcopenia in a primary care setting are reviewed based on the screening and diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: With an increasing aging population, it is important to understand the challenges in the management of sarcopenia in a primary care setting. Identification of elderly at risk of sarcopenia, followed by referring the affected elderly for confirmation of the diagnosis, is essential to preventing the adverse health effects. The initiation of treatment that comprises resistance exercise training and nutrition should not be delayed, as they are salient in the management of sarcopenia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study conducted online, using Google FormTM recruited 207 Medical Officers from 14 public primary health centres, with a response rate of 74%. The Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Questionnaire for Family Physicians (KAPQFP) was used to assess PCPs' knowledge, attitude and practice in dementia care. Items in each domain were scored on a 4-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 1 to 4. Each domain's mean score was divided by 4 and converted to a scale of 100, with higher scores indicating better knowledge, attitude and practice. Bivariate analyses were conducted to determine the factors associated with cognitive evaluation practice.
RESULTS: The overall mean practice score was 3.53±0.52 (88.3%), which is substantially higher than the mean score for perceived competency and knowledge of 2.46±0.51 (61.5%). The mean score for attitude towards dementia and collaboration with nurses and other healthcare professionals was 3.36±0.49 (84.0%) and 3.43±0.71 (85.8%), respectively. PCPs with prior dementia training showed better practice (p=0.006), as did PCPs with longer primary care work experience (p=0.038). A significant positive association was found between knowledge-practice ((rs=0.207, p=0.003), attitude towards dementia practice ((rs=0.478, p<0.001), and attitude towards collaboration with other healthcare professionals-practice (rs= 0.427, p<0.001). Limited time and inadequate knowledge regarding dementia diagnosis and cognitive evaluation tools were among the reasons cognitive evaluations were not performed.
CONCLUSION: PCPs demonstrated better practice of cognitive evaluation, as compared to their knowledge and attitude. Given that their perceived competency and knowledge on dementia diagnosis is low and is positively associated with their practice, it is crucial to implement a comprehensive dementia training to enhance their knowledge and confidence on early detection of cognitive decline and cognitive evaluation in order to achieve better dementia detection in primary care.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 390 participants from a primary care clinic in Selangor, Malaysia, between February and June 2022. The inclusion criteria were high-CV risk individuals, that is, Framingham risk score >20%, diabetes without target organ damage, stage 3 kidney disease, and very high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >4.9 mmol/L or blood pressure (BP) >180/110 mmHg. Individuals with existing CVD were excluded. The treatment targets were BP <140/90 mmHg (≤135/75 for diabetics), LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L, and HbA1c ≤6.5%. Multiple logistic regressions determined the association between sociodemographic, clinical characteristics, health literacy, and medication adherence with the achievements of each target.
RESULTS: About 7.2% achieved all treatment targets. Of these, 35.1% reached systolic and diastolic (46.7%) BP targets. About 60.2% and 28.2% achieved optimal LDL-C and HbA1c, respectively. Working participants had lower odds of having optimal systolic (aOR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.13-0.90) and diastolic (aOR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.96) BP. Those who adhered to treatments were more likely to achieve LDL-C and HbA1c targets; (aOR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.10-2.69) and (aOR = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.25-4.83), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The control of risk factors among high CV risk patients in this study was suboptimal. Urgent measures such as improving medication adherence are warranted.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted across four health clinics from February 2022 to May 2022. As part of the study, self-administered questionnaires were completed to determine symptoms related to SBS. An indoor air quality (IAQ) assessment was conducted four times daily for fifteen minutes at five areas in each clinic (laboratory, lobby, emergency room, pharmacy, and examination room).
RESULT: Most of the areas illustrated poor air movement (<0.15 m/s), except for the laboratory. The total bacterial count (TBC) was above the standard limit in both the lobby and emergency room (>500 CFU/m3). The prevalence of SBS was 24.84% (77) among the healthcare workers at the health clinics. A significant association with SBS was noted for those working in the examination room (COR = 2.86; 95% CI = 1.31; 6.27) and those experiencing high temperature sometimes (COR = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.11; 0.55), varying temperature sometimes (COR = 0.31; 95% CI = 0.003), stuffy air sometimes (COR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.005; 0.64), dry air sometimes (COR = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.007; 0.64), and dust sometimes (COR = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.11; 0.60) and everyday (COR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.14; 0.81). Only healthcare workers in the examination room (AOR = 3.17; 95% CI = 1.35; 7.41) were found to have a significant risk of SBS when controlling for other variables.
CONCLUSION: SBS is prevalent among healthcare workers at health clinics.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of online health information-seeking and its associated factors among patients in primary care in Malaysia. We also examined the reasons for, and the sources of, online health information-seeking, patients' level of trust in the information found and what the information was used for.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire was conducted on patients who attended a primary care clinic. The questionnaire included the use of the internet to seek health information, sources and types of health information, eHealth literacy, patients' trust in online information, and how patients appraise and use online health information.
RESULTS: Out of 381 patients in this study, 54.7% (n = 208) used the internet to search for health information. Patients mainly sought information via Google (96.2%) and the most common websites that they visited were Wikipedia (45.2%) and MyHEALTH (37.5%). Higher levels of education, longer duration of internet use, and higher eHealth literacy were significantly associated with online HISB. Patients' trust in websites (45.6%) and social media (20.7%) was low when compared to trust in healthcare professionals (87.9%). Only 12.9% (n = 22) of patients had discussed online health information with their doctors.
CONCLUSION: Online HISB was common among primary care patients; however, their eHealth literacy was low, with suboptimal appraisal skills to evaluate the accuracy of online health information.
METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted at a university primary care clinic. Patients aged 18 to 80 years old with MetS were recruited. Socio-demographic characteristic, clinical characteristics and information on TCM use and its pattern were recorded in a proforma. Patient's experience of chronic disease conventional care was measured using PACIC-M questionnaire. The comparison of PACIC-M mean score between TCM users and non-users was measured using independent t-test. The factors associated with TCM use were determined by simple logistic regression (SLogR), followed by multiple logistic regression (MLogR).
RESULTS: Out of 394 participants, 381 (96.7%) were included in the final analysis. Of the 381 participants, 255 (66.9%) were TCM users (95% CI 62.7, 71.7). Only 36.9% of users disclosed about TCM use to their health care providers (HCP). The overall mean PACIC-M score was 2.91 (SD ± 0.04). TCM users had significantly higher mean PACIC-M score compared to non-users (2.98 ± 0.74 vs 2.75 ± 0.72, p = 0.01). The independent factors associated with TCM use were being female (Adj. OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.55, 4.06), having high education level (Adj. OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.37, 3.41) and having high overall PACIC-M mean score (Adj. OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.10, 2.03).
CONCLUSION: TCM use was highly prevalent in this primary care clinic. However, the disclosure rate of TCM use to HCP was low. Females, those with high education and high PACIC-M mean score were more likely to use TCM. Further research should explore the reasons for their TCM use, despite having good experience in conventional chronic disease care.