METHODS: The newly developed CKDPS instrument was tested on 300 patients with diabetes mellitus in a cross-sectional study. The number of domains, model-fit index, construct validity, and internal consistency of this instrument were determined using exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
RESULTS: The EFA yielded nine domains: illness identity, timeline motivation, medical practice and co-operation for Social Psychology, and perceived benefit, perceived barriers, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, and perceived cue to action for HBM. Four items with low factor loading were removed. CFA yielded the following fit indices for Social Psychology: the goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.889, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.934, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.053, normed chi-square (NC) = 1.831; and the following for HBM: GFI = 0.834, CFI = 0.957, RMSEA = 0.053, NC = 1.830. Values of Cronbach's α ranged between 0.760 and 0.909.
CONCLUSIONS: The CKDPS includes 61 questions across nine domains, divided under two categories of Social Psychology and HBM. It is also a valid and reliable tool for measuring diabetic patients' perception of CKD prevention that can be used in larger studies.
METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted involving biopsy-proven IgAN patients in clinical remission with matched controls in a Malaysian tertiary centre. Demographic data, routine blood and urine results were recorded. Stool samples were collected and their DNA was extracted by 16S rRNA gene sequencing to profile their gut microbiota.
RESULTS: Thirty-six IgAN patients (13 male; 23 female) with the mean age of 45.5 ± 13.4 years and median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 79.0 (62.1-92.2) mls/min/1.73m2 with median remission of 7 years were analysed and compared with 12 healthy controls (4 male; 8 female) with the mean age of 46.5 ± 13.5 years and eGFR of 86.5 (74.2-93.7) mls/min/1.73m2. Other demographic and laboratory parameters such as gender, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), haemoglobin, serum urea and serum albumin were comparable between the two groups. There were no significant differences seen in the Operational Taxonomic Unit (OTU) and alpha diversity (Shannon index) between IgAN and healthy controls. Alpha diversity increased with increasing CKD stage (p = 0.025). Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B) ratio was low in both IgAN and healthy cohort. Fusobacteria phylum was significantly increased (p = 0.005) whereas Euryarchaoeota phylum was reduced (p = 0.016) in the IgAN group as compared to the control cohort.
CONCLUSION: Although we found no differences in OTU and alpha diversity between IgAN in remission and control cohort, there were some differences between the two groups at phylum level.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out among 305 Malaysian adults in six major districts, selected from urban, semi-urban, and rural settings in one state in Malaysia. A self-administered questionnaire was used in this study. It was comprised of socio-demographics, risk-taking behaviors, and validated domains of the Health Belief Model (HBM).
RESULTS: The mean (± SD) age of the respondents was 34.5 (± 9.6) and the majority (59.0%) of them were 30 years or older. Almost 20.7% of the respondents felt they were susceptible to colorectal cancer. Self-reported perceived susceptibility mirrored unsatisfactory screening behaviors owing to the lack of doctors' recommendation, ignorance of screening modalities, procrastination, and the perception that screening was unnecessary. Factors significantly associated with perceived susceptibility to colorectal cancer were gender (OR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.0-3.3), age (OR = 2. 2, 95% CI 1.2-4.0), ethnicity (OR = 0. 3, 95% CI 0.2-0.6), family history of colorectal cancer (OR = 3. 2, 95% CI 1.4-7.4) and alcohol intake (OR = 3.9, 95% CI 2.1-7.5).
CONCLUSION: The present study revealed that screening behavior among respondents was unsatisfactory. Hence, awareness of the importance of screening to prevent colorectal cancers is imperative.
METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label study on patients undergoing bronchoscopy, randomized into the control and interventional (VR) groups. The control group received standard care during FB. The interventional group was given a VR device during FB showing nature videos with soothing instrumental music. Pain, breathlessness, and cough were evaluated using a 10 cm visual analogue scale administered before and after FB. Anxiety was assessed using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Satisfaction questionnaire (5-point Likert scale) was given to participants post FB.
RESULTS: Eighty participants enrolled, 40 in each arm. Median (IQR) satisfaction score in the VR group was 5.0 (3.0-5.0), and in the control group was 4.0 (3.0-5.0); (p
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study carried out in HCTM, UKM, Kuala Lumpur. TS participants who attended clinic in HCTM, UKM and controls who were hospital staff members were recruited via purposive sampling. TS participants' sociodemographic and clinical profiles were retrieved from medical records. Two validated, translated questionnaires; World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF) questionnaire and Body Image Disturbances Questionnaires (BIDQ) were completed by participants.
RESULTS: A total of 34 TS patients were approached and 24 (70.5%) of them participated in this study. Their median (IQR) age was 24.0 (7.0) years and their responses were compared to 60 age-matched healthy females as controls [median age (IQR) = 24.0 (8.0) years]. The most common medical problem in TS participants was premature ovarian insufficiency (n = 23; 95.8%). There were no significant differences between TS and control groups' median scores (overall QOL; 4.00 vs. 4.00, general health; 3.50 vs. 4.00, physical health; 14.86 vs. 15.43, psychological health; 14.67 vs. 14.00 and environment; 15.00 vs. 15.50) of the different WHOQOL-BREF domains. However, TS participants were found to score 13.33 against 16.00, lower than the control group (p
METHODS: This was a prospective, randomised, observer-blinded study. Two keloids on the same site were randomly assigned to receive either daily topical clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing (Scar 1) or monthly IL triamcinolone injection (Scar 2). Efficacy was assessed using patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) at 4-weekly intervals up to 12 weeks. Dimension of keloid and adverse effects were also assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 34 scars from 17 patients completed the study. There was significant improvement of POSAS at 12 weeks compared to baseline within each treatment group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in POSAS at 12 weeks between the two treatments. Keloid dimensions showed a similar trend of improvement by week 12 with either treatment (p = 0.002 in Scar 1, p = 0.005 for Scar 2). However, there was no significant difference between the treatment. In the IL triamcinolone group, all patients reported pain and 70.6% observed necrotic skin reaction. There was a significantly higher rate of adverse effects such as erythema (41.2 vs. 17.6%), hypopigmentation (35.3 vs. 23.5%), telangiectasia (41.2 vs. 17.6%) and skin atrophy (23.5 vs. 5.9%) documented in the IL triamcinolone group when compared to clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing.
CONCLUSION: Clobetasol propionate 0.05% cream under occlusion with silicone dressing is equally effective and has fewer adverse effects compared to IL triamcinolone. Hence, it may be used as an alternative treatment for keloid particularly in patients with low pain threshold, needle phobia and those who prefers home-based treatment.
OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the updated pooled effects of these polymorphisms with DN among Asian populations with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS: The PubMed electronic database was searched without duration filter until August 2017 and the reference list of eligible studies was screened. The association of each polymorphism with DN was examined using odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval based on dominant, recessive and allele models. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on region, DN definition and DM duration.
RESULTS: In the main analysis, the ACE I/D (all models) and AGTR1 A1166C (dominant model) showed a significant association with DN. The main analysis of the AGT M235T polymorphism did not yield significant findings. There were significant subgroup differences and indication of significantly higher odds for DN in terms of DM duration (≥10 years) for ACE I/D (all models), AGT M235T (recessive and allele models) and AGTR1 A1166C (recessive model). Significant subgroup differences were also observed for DN definition (advanced DN group) and region (South Asia) for AGTR1 A1166C (recessive model).
CONCLUSION: In the Asian populations, ACE I/D and AGTR1 A1166C may contribute to DN susceptibility in patients with T2DM by different genetic models. However, the role of AGT M235T needs to be further evaluated.