METHODS: A one-year survey was conducted in three states of the east coast region of Peninsular Malaysia involving 204 CBR workers selected through universal sampling method where all CBR staff who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected as participants. Self-completed questionnaires consisted of 20 association factors on six-point Likert scale responses were distributed. Total mean satisfaction level and mean associated factors were reported in this study.
RESULTS: The results showed that the majority of the participants were between 20 and 40 years old (72%), female (96%), Malay (99%) and had 1-5 years of working experience. The mean total satisfaction score was 79.8 ± SD = 7.85. The highest mean satisfaction level for the associated factor was 4.6 ± SD = 0.59 with about 95% of the participants were satisfied that "CBR programme is a challenging work", while the lowest satisfaction level for associated factor was on "salary of community-based rehabilitation staff is acceptable", with mean score of 2.3 ± SD = 0.97 with about 59% of the participants felt dissatisfied. The results of this study determined that the highest dissatisfied factors among CBR workers were on salary.
CONCLUSION: These findings provided useful information for policymakers to evaluate this issue for a sustainable CBR programme in the future.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study has been registered for trial as 'retrospective registered' in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (registration no.: ACTRN 12618001101279 ) on 5th October 2018.
SETTING: The analysis was from the perspective of the National Health Service in England and Wales.
PARTICIPANTS: 6221 patients from four of the Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study centres (two UK, two Australian), 6308 patients from the Atlantic Diabetes in Pregnancy study and 12 755 patients from UK clinical practice.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES PLANNED: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), net monetary benefit (NMB) and the probability of being cost-effective at CE thresholds of £20 000 and £30 000 per QALY.
RESULTS: In a population of pregnant women from the four HAPO study centres and using NICE-defined risk factors for GDM, diagnosing GDM using NICE 2015 criteria had an NMB of £239 902 (relative to no treatment) at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY compared with WHO 2013 criteria, which had an NMB of £186 675. NICE 2015 criteria had a 51.5% probability of being cost-effective compared with the WHO 2013 diagnostic criteria, which had a 27.6% probability of being cost-effective (no treatment had a 21.0% probability of being cost-effective). For women without NICE risk factors in this population, the NMBs for NICE 2015 and WHO 2013 criteria were both negative relative to no treatment and no treatment had a 78.1% probability of being cost-effective.
CONCLUSION: The NICE 2015 diagnostic criteria for GDM can be considered cost-effective relative to the WHO 2013 alternative at a CE threshold of £30 000 per QALY. Universal screening for GDM was not found to be cost-effective relative to screening based on NICE risk factors.
METHODS: A Delphi questionnaire consisted of 29 Part 1 and nine Part 2 indicators which were incorporated into a tool called Simpler™. The indicators were mainly sourced from American, Australian and Malaysian diabetes management guidelines. Diabetes experts were asked to rank indicators in the order of importance in Part 1. In Part 2, indicators had to be chosen for inclusion into Simpler™ using a fivepoint Likert scale. The consensus level was pre-set at 60%.
RESULTS: A three round Delphi process was used to validate all 38 indicators by 12 experts from Australia and Malaysia: five pharmacists, four doctors, two endocrinologists and a diabetes nurse. Consensus was reached for 93.1% (27/29) of the Part 1 indicators and all nine Part 2 indicators (100%). Five out of nine indicators in Part 2 questionnaire obtained consensus disagreement for inclusion into the Simpler ™ tool.
CONCLUSION: The Simpler™ tool is the first structured diabetes multifactorial tool to address all seven evidence-based factors. The tool was refined and validated by multi-disciplinary health professionals from Australia and Malaysia. Pharmacists can use the Simpler™ tool to facilitate evidence-based comprehensive individualised care among type 2 diabetes patients.
METHOD: This cross-sectional study assessed the level of general nutrition knowledge in a convenience sample of Australian carers (C) of people with ID and compared this to the general Australian community (CM). Nutrition knowledge was evaluated using the validated General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire. Total knowledge score as well as performance on instrument sub-sections (dietary guidelines, nutrient sources, healthy food choices and diet disease relationships) were assessed (expressed as %). Knowledge scores were adjusted for known confounders (age, sex, education level, BMI, living arrangement and English spoken at home) using generalised linear modelling.
RESULTS: A total of 589 participants were recruited (C: n = 40; CM: n = 549). Age (C: 40.8 ± 12.1 year; CM: 37.8 ± 13.3 years; P = 0.145), sex distribution (C: 62.5%; CM: 67.2% female; P = 0.602) and English spoken at home (C: 82.5%; CM: 89.6%; P = 0.183) were similar between groups, but BMI (C: 28.5 ± 5.7 kgm-2 ; CM: 25.3 kgm-2 ; P = 0.002) was significantly lower and tertiary education (C: 52.5%; CM: 85.1%; P
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multiphase observational study will employ embedded mixed methods with a qualitative/quantitative priority: corating functional vision and O&M during social inquiry. Australian O&M agencies (n=15) provide the sampling frame. O&M specialists will use quota sampling to generate cross-sectional assessment data (n=400) before investigating selected cohorts in outcome studies. Cultural relevance of the VROOM and OMO tools will be investigated in Malaysia, where the tools will inform the design of assistive devices and evaluate prototypes. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, Rasch modelling, cluster analysis and analysis of variance will be undertaken along with descriptive analysis of measurement data. Qualitative findings will be used to interpret VROOM and OMO scores, filter statistically significant results, warrant their generalisability and identify additional relevant constructs that could also be measured.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Human Research Ethics Committee at Swinburne University (SHR Project 2016/316). Dissemination of results will be via agency reports, journal articles and conference presentations.