METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted on a sample of 256 conveniently selected elderly Malaysians who were residing in the states of Selangor and Kuala Lumpur. A pre-validated interview-administered questionnaire was used to gather information. Data was entered into PASW version 18 and analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 256 questionnaires were included in the study. A response rate of 64% was achieved. Out of 256 respondents, 92 (35.9%) were male while 164 (64.1%) were female. More than half of the respondents (n = 141; 55.1%) agreed that CAM is more effective than allopathic medicine. Chinese respondents showed strong belief in the effectiveness of CAM. In terms of safety of CAM, close to three quarters of respondents (n = 178; 69.5%) believed that CAM is safer than allopathic medicine. A large majority of respondents agreed that CAM has less side effects compared to allopathic medicine (n = 201; 78.5%) and also agreed that CAM is good to maintain overall health and wellbeing (n = 212; 82.8%). A majority of the respondents expressed that they use CAM because allopathic medicine is less effective (n = 113; 44.1%).
CONCLUSION: The current study reflects the reasons of using CAM among lay public from different ethnicities. There are no reports of adverse effects related to CAM use. Future approaches should be intended for awareness campaigns for consumers, highlighting safety profile of CAM and as well as forbidding their use without the consultation of healthcare professional.
METHODS: This was an observational study that employed qualitative methods to interview key informants covering relevant stakeholders. The study was guided by the systems theory. In all, 30 in-depth interviews were conducted involving 8 community health officers, 8 community volunteers, and 14 women receiving postnatal care in four (4) CHPS zones in the Yendi Municipality. The data were thematically analysed using Atlas.ti.v.7 software and manual coding system.
RESULTS: The participants reported poor clinical attendance including delays in seeking health care, low antenatal and postnatal care visits. The barriers of the CHPS utilization include lack of transportation, poor road network, cultural beliefs (e.g. taboos of certain foods), proof of women's faithfulness to their husbands and absence of health workers. Other challenges were poor communication networks during emergencies, and inaccessibility of ambulance service. In seeking health care, insured members of the national health insurance scheme (NHIS) still pay for services that are covered by the NHIS. We found that the CHPS compounds lack the capacity to sterilize some of their equipment, lack of incentives for Community Health Officers and Community Health Volunteers and inadequate infrastructures such as potable water and electricity. The study also observed poor coordination of interventions, inadequate equipment and poor community engagement as setbacks to the progress of the CHPS policy.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical attendance, timing and number of antenatal and postnatal care visits, remain major concerns for the CHPS programme in the study setting. The CHPS barriers include transportation, poor road network, cost of referrals, cultural beliefs, inadequate equipment, lack of incentives and poor community engagement. There is an urgent need to address these challenges to improve the utilization of CHPS compounds and to contribute to achieving the sustainable development goals.