RESULTS: Twenty-two patients (from 16 unrelated families) were molecularly diagnosed as XLA. Genetic testing revealed fifteen distinct mutations, including four splicing mutations, four missense mutations, three nonsense mutations, three short deletions, and one large indel mutation. These mutations scattered throughout the BTK gene and mostly affected the kinase domain. All mutations including five novel mutations were predicted to be pathogenic or deleterious by in silico prediction tools. Genetic testing confirmed that eleven mothers and seven sisters were carriers for the disease, while three mutations were de novo. Flow cytometric analysis showed that thirteen patients had minimal BTK expression (0-15%) while eight patients had reduced BTK expression (16-64%). One patient was not tested for monocyte BTK expression due to insufficient sample. Pneumonia (n=13) was the most common manifestation, while Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most frequently isolated pathogen from the patients (n=4). Mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 was reported in four patients.
CONCLUSION: This report provides the first overview of demographic, clinical, immunological and genetic data of XLA in Malaysia. The combination of flow cytometric assessment and BTK genetic analysis provides a definitive diagnosis for XLA patients, especially with atypical clinical presentation. In addition, it may also allow carrier detection and assist in genetic counselling and prenatal diagnosis.
METHODS: We searched the official Web sites and homepages of the responsible leading patient safety agencies of the three countries. We reviewed all publicly available guidelines, regulatory documents, government reports that included policies, guidelines, strategy papers, reports, evaluation programs, as well as scientific articles and gray literature related to the incident reporting system. We used the World Health Organization components of patient safety reporting system as the guidelines for comparison and analyzed the documents using descriptive comparative analysis.
RESULTS: Taiwan had the most incidents reported, followed by Malaysia and Indonesia. Taiwan Patient Safety Reporting (TPR) and the Malaysian Reporting and Learning System had similar attributes and followed the World Health Organization components for incident reporting. We found differences between the Indonesian system and both of TPR and the Malaysian system. Indonesia did not have an external reporting deadline, analysis and learning were conducted at the national level, and there was a lack of transparency and public access to data and reports. All systems need to establish a clear and structured incident reporting evaluation framework if they are to be successful.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TPR and Malaysian system, the Indonesian patient safety incident reporting system seemed to be ineffective because it failed to acquire adequate national incident reporting data and lacked transparency; these deficiencies inhibited learning at the national level. We suggest further research on the implementation at the hospital level to see how far national guidelines and policy have been implemented in each country.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study consists of two parts. First, a cross-sectional study on the knowledge of and attitude towards leprosy using an online quesitonnaire was conducted among doctors working in the primary care clinics and hospitals in Sabah and Labuan. Subsequently, the participants were asked to watched an online prerecorded video lecture on leprosy and to answered the same questionnaire.
RESULTS: Of the 310 participants, one fifth (20.6%) had good knowledge and 36.5% had positive attitude towards leprosy. Being a specialist (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.17-9.57, p < 0.001), managed ≥ 5 leprosy cases (aOR 3.37, 95% CI 1.52-7.47, p = 0.003), and involved in educational activities related to leprosy within last year (aOR 4.7, 95% CI 1.69-13.04, p < 0.001) were the significant predictors of good knowledge. Working in tertiary care was significantly associated with good attitude towards leprosy (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.22-3.94, p = 0.025). There was a significant improvement in participants' knowledge post-intervention (87.0% participants post-lecture vs 20.6% participants pre-lecture with good knowledge, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The proportion of doctors in Sabah and Labuan with good knowledge and attitude towards leprosy was low. Knowledge of leprosy improved significantly postintervention. This highlights the need for educational and training programmes to improve doctors' knowledge of leprosy.
METHODS: We report 12-month post-treatment data from a single-blind, active-controlled trial (October 2017-August 2019) where 327 Myanmar refugees in Malaysia were assigned to either six sessions of IAT (n = 164) or cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) (n = 163). Primary outcomes were posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, and persistent complex bereavement disorder (PCBD) symptom scores at treatment end and 12-month post-treatment. Secondary outcome was functional impairment.
RESULTS: 282 (86.2%) participants were retained at 12-month follow-up. For both groups, large treatment effects for common mental disorders (CMD) symptoms were maintained at 12-month post-treatment compared to baseline (d = 0.75-1.13). Although participants in IAT had greater symptom reductions and larger effect sizes than CBT participants for all CMDs at treatment end, there were no significant differences between treatment arms at 12-month post-treatment for PTSD [mean difference: -0.9, 95% CI (-2.5 to 0.6), p = 0.25], depression [mean difference: 0.1, 95% CI (-0.6 to 0.7), p = 0.89), anxiety [mean difference: -0.4, 95% CI (-1.4 to 0.6), p = 0.46], and PCBD [mean difference: -0.6, 95% CI (-3.1 to 1.9), p = 0.65]. CBT participants showed greater improvement in functioning than IAT participants at 12-month post-treatment [mean difference: -2.5, 95% CI (-4.7 to -0.3], p = 0.03]. No adverse effects were recorded for either therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Both IAT and CBT showed sustained treatment gains for CMD symptoms amongst refugees over the 12-month period.
SETTING: Two cohorts of international exchange programme for second year medical students in the UK and Malaysia.
DESIGN: Interpretivist qualitative design using semistructured interviews/focus groups with students and faculty.
METHODS: Participants were asked about their learning experiences during and after the exchange. Data were recorded with consent and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data.
RESULTS: Four themes were identified: (1) overall benefits of the exchange programme, (2) personal growth and development, (3) understanding and observing a different educational environment and (4) experiencing different healthcare systems.
CONCLUSION: The international exchange programme highlighted differences in learning approaches, students from both campuses gained valuable learning experiences which increased their personal growth, confidence, cultural competence, giving them an appreciation of a better work-life balance and effective time management skills. It is often a challenge to prepare healthcare professionals for work in a global multicultural workplace and we would suggest that exchange programmes early on in a medical curriculum would go some way to addressing this challenge.