METHODS: A web-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 1280 healthcare providers aged 18 years and older from 30 primary care clinics in Selangor, Malaysia. In this study, the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory was used to assess burnout. The results were analyzed using multiple logistic regression.
RESULTS: The prevalence of personal burnout was 41.7%, followed by work-related burnout (32.2%) and client-related burnout (14.5%). The determinants for personal burnout in this study were younger age, being a doctor, higher COVID-19 exposure risk, do not know where to seek help, inability to handle stress, poorer sleep quality score, higher total COVID-19 fear score, higher total stress score, and lower total BRS score. The determinants of work-related burnout were younger age, being a doctor, longer years of working, higher COVID-19 exposure risk, do not know where to seek help, lower altruistic score, poorer sleep quality score, higher total stress score, and lower total brief resilience score (BRS) score. The determinants of client-related burnout were doctor, single/divorced, more than one attachment site, and higher satisfaction toward the infection control, inability to handle stress, higher total depression score, and lower total BRS score.
CONCLUSION: Every fourth out of ten suffered from personal burnout, one-third from work-related burnout, and one-seventh from client-related burnout among healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare systems must take care of healthcare workers' physical and emotional depletion, reducing the risk of burnout.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed literature search using 4 databases from Medline, Cinahl, PubMed and Scopus from inception up to March 15, 2021 and selected relevant cross-sectional studies. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence while risk factors were reported in odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI.
RESULTS: We included 148 studies with 159,194 HCPs and the pooled prevalence for depression was 37.5% (95%CI: 33.8-41.3), anxiety 39.7(95%CI: 34.3-45.1), stress 36.4% (95%CI: 23.2-49.7), fear 71.3% (95%CI: 54.6-88.0), burnout 68.3% (95%CI: 54.0-82.5), and low resilience was 16.1% (95%CI: 12.8-19.4), respectively. The heterogeneity was high (I2>99.4%). Meta-analysis reported that both females (OR = 1.48; 95% CI = 1.30-1.68) and nurses (OR = 1.21; 95%CI = 1.02-1.45) were at increased risk of having depression and anxiety [(Female: OR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.49-1.85), (Nurse: OR = 1.36; 95%CI = 1.16-1.58)]. Females were at increased risk of getting stress (OR = 1.59; 95%CI = 1.28-1.97).
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, one third of HCPs suffered from depression, anxiety and stress and more than two third of HCPs suffered from fear and burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic in Asia.
DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study.
SETTING: Tertiary hospitals in Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus (n = 418) who deliver their neonates at two major tertiary hospitals in Malaysia.
MEASUREMENTS: Neonatal outcomes, such as low birth weight, preterm birth, macrosomia, metabolic and electrolyte disorders, neonatal respiratory distress and congenital anomalies were determined.
FINDINGS: Prevalence of low birth weight in neonates born to mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus was 14.6%, followed by metabolic and electrolyte disorders 10.5%, preterm birth 9.1%, macrosomia 4.8%, neonatal respiratory distress 5.8% and congenital anomalies (2.4%). Among the adverse neonatal outcomes, neonatal respiratory distress was significantly associated with the presence of depression symptoms in mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus using univariate analysis (p = 0.010). After controlling for confounding factors, predictors for neonatal respiratory distress at delivery were the presence of depression symptoms in mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus (Adjusted OR = 3.87, 95% CI = 1.32-11.35), living without a husband (Adjusted OR = 9.74, 95% CI = 2.04-46.51), preterm delivery (Adjusted OR = 7.20, 95% CI = 2.23-23.30), caesarean section (Adjusted OR = 3.33, 95% CI = 1.09-10.15), being nulliparous and primiparous (Adjusted OR = 3.62, 95% CI = 1.17-11.17) and having family history of diabetes (Adjusted OR = 3.20, 95% CI = 1.11-9.21).
KEY CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study demonstrate the positive association of neonatal respiratory distress with the presence of depression symptoms in mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: It is therefore important to identify depression symptoms after a diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus in pregnant mothers is made to enable early referral and interventions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: For women in the intervention arm (n = 130), they received one session of individualized health education at 36 gestational weeks, a booklet of diabetes prevention, five-session of postpartum booster educational program which were conducted including 1 session of dietary and exercise counseling by dietician and physiotherapist at 6 weeks postpartum. For women in the control group (n = 168), standard treatment whereby they had received group therapy on diet and physical activity modification by dietician and staff nurses during the antenatal period.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups for most of the variables examined except for educational level which the control group had a higher education than the intervention group. The women assigned to system-based intervention have a significant difference to GDM women who were assigned to the control group for LDL and HDL but not in anthropometric measurements, blood pressure, glucose index, total cholesterol, and triglyceride. In addition, it was found that the incidence of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) 2 years after delivery was 20% in the intervention arm compared to 17% in the control arm.
CONCLUSION: The system-based intervention was not statistically superior to the control intervention as there is no difference in terms of incidence of T2DM between the intervention and control group. We, therefore, suggested that more intensive interventions are needed to prevent GDM from developing into T2DM.
METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted using the systematic sampling method in four government primary healthcare clinics in Sarawak. A self-administered questionnaire was used to obtain socio-demographic data and evaluate non-adherence. Blood pressure was measured, and relevant clinical variables were collected from medical records. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the determinants of medication non-adherence.
RESULTS: A total of 488 patients with uncontrolled hypertension were enrolled in this study. The prevalence of medication non-adherence was 39.3%. There were four predictors of medication non-adherence among the patients with uncontrolled hypertension: tertiary educational level (odds ratio [OR]=4.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.67-10.61, P=0.010), complementary alternative medication (0R=2.03, 95% CI=1.12-3.69, P=0.020), non-usage of calcium channel blockers (0R=1.57, 95% CI=1.02-2.41, P=0.039) and 1 mmHg increase in the systolic blood pressure (0R=1.03, 95% CI=1.00-1.05, P=0.006).
CONCLUSION: Because of the high prevalence of medication non-adherence among patients with uncontrolled hypertension, primary care physicians should be more vigilant in identifying those at risk of being non-adherent. Early intervention should be conducted to address non-adherence for blood pressure control.