METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed at two chemotherapy providers. Patients were questioned about use of three categories of CAM, mind-body practices (MBPs), natural products (NPs) and traditional medicine (TM). PFH was also examined separately from CAM to better characterise the patterns of CAM and PFH used during chemotherapy.
RESULTS: A total of 546 eligible patients participated in the study; 70.7% (n = 386) reported using some form of CAM, and 29.3% (n = 160) were non-CAM users. When PFH was excluded as a CAM, fewer patients reported the use of CAM (66.1%; n = 361). The total number of patients who used MBPs decreased from 342 to 183. The most common CAM use category was NPs (82.8%), followed by MBPs (50.7%), and TM (35.7%). CAM users were more likely to have a tertiary education (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.15-3.89 vs. primary/lower), have household incomes > RM 3,000 (≈944 USD) per month (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.40-3.84 vs. ≤RM 3,000 (≈944 USD)), and have advanced cancer (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.18-2.59 vs. early stage cancer), compared with non-CAM users. The CAM users were less likely to have their chemotherapy on schedule (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58 vs. chemotherapy postponed) than non-CAM users. Most MBPs were perceived to be more helpful by their users, compared with the users of NPs and TM.
CONCLUSION: CAM use was prevalent among breast cancer patients. Excluding PFH from the definition of CAM reduced the prevalence of overall CAM use. Overall, CAM use was associated with higher education levels and household incomes, advanced cancer and lower chemotherapy schedule compliance. Many patients perceived MBP to be beneficial for improving overall well-being during chemotherapy. These findings, while preliminary, clearly indicate the differences in CAM use when PFH is included in, and excluded from, the definition of CAM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This pilot cross-sectional survey was conducted among breast cancer survivors (n=40) who were members of Breast Cancer Support Group Centre Johor Bahru. A validated self-administered questionnaire was used to identify the relationships between socio-demography, medical characteristics and HR-QOL of the participants.
RESULTS: Living with family and completion of treatment were significant predictive factors of self-rated QOL, while living with family and ever giving birth significantly predicted satisfaction with health and physical health. Psychological health had moderate correlations with number of children and early cancer stage. Survivors' higher personal income (>MYR4,500) was the only significant predictor of social relationship, while age, income more than MYR4,500 and giving birth significantly predicted environment domain score.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggested the survivors coped better in all four HR-QOL domains if they were married, lived with family, had children and were employed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross sectional study was carried out to examine the breast cancer prevention information seeking behavior among 450 students at one private university in Malaysia.
RESULTS: The mean age of respondents was 25±4.3 years. Common interpersonal information sources were doctors, friends, and nurses and common channel information sources were television, brochure, and internet. Overall, 89.9% used cell phones, 46.1% had an interest in receiving cell phone breast cancer prevention messages, 73.9% used text messaging, and 36.7% had an interest in receiving text breast cancer prevention messages. Bivariate analysis revealed significant differences among age, eduation, nationality and use of cell phones.
CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of health information seeking behavior is important for community health educators to target populations for program development.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive, cross sectional survey was conducted using a sample of 500 Malaysian adolescents from the age of 15 to 19 years. A self-administered questionnaire was used to gather socio- demographic characteristics, knowledge of BSE, knowledge of risk factors for breast cancer and BSE practices.
RESULTS: The findings of this study indicated that female adolescents in Malaysia demonstrated an inadequate knowledge level of BSE and risk factors for breast cancer. Only 27.8% of female adolescents performed BSE regularly. BSE practice, knowledge of BSE and knowledge of risk factors for breast cancer showed significant positive relationships.
CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted the importance of planning and implementing breast health education programs for female students in secondary schools in Malaysia. It will also provide the health care providers an avenue to stress on the importance of imparting breast health education to adolescents.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six focus groups were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide on 40 informants (employed multiethnic survivors). Survivors were stratified into three groups for successfully RTW, and another three groups of survivors who were unable to return to work. Each of the three groups was ethnically homogeneous. Thematic analysis using a constant comparative approach was aided by in vivo software.
RESULTS: Participants shared numerous barriers and facilitators which directly or interactively affect RTW. Key barriers were physical-psychological after-effects of treatment, fear of potential environment hazards, high physical job demand, intrusive negative thoughts and overprotective family. Key facilitators were social support, employer support, and regard for financial independence. Across ethnic groups, the main facilitators were financial-independence (for Chinese), and socialisation opportunity (for Malay). A key barrier was after-effects of treatment, expressed across all ethnic groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Numerous barriers were identified in the non-RTW survivors. Health professionals and especially occupational therapists should be consulted to assist the increasing survivors by providing occupational rehabilitation to enhance RTW amongst employed survivors. Future research to identify prognostic factors can guide clinical efforts to restore cancer survivors to their desired level/type of occupational functioning for productivity and wellbeing.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional descriptive study on a convenience sample of 100 Malaysian breast cancer survivors.
FINDINGS: The reported use of CAM among the breast cancer survivors was lower than in other studies but the types of CAM used had a similar pattern with nutrition supplements/vitamins being the most common. The factors that positively influenced the use of complimentary/traditional therapy were income and getting information from television or radio. Survivors with access to internet/blogs appear to have lower odds of using complimentary/traditional therapy compared to the respondents who reported no such access.
CONCLUSIONS: Information transmitted via television and radio appears to have a positive influence on CAM use by breast cancer patients compared to other information sources and it is important to ensure that such information is accurate and impartial.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study. Oncology practitioners were recruited from a major cancer center in Singapore and through two regional cancer meetings that took place in Singapore and Malaysia in 2013.
RESULTS: A total of 126 oncology practitioners from various Southeast Asian countries, mostly nurses (58.7 %) and physicians (37.3 %), were recruited. The majority of the respondents agreed that fatigue (78.4 %) and anxiety (69.1 %) were the most common physical and psychosocial problems experienced by BCS. Monitoring for physical and treatment-related adverse effects (80.7 %) and reviewing patients' noncancer medical history (65.3 %) were the most practiced aspects of follow-up care. Compared with the other practitioners, the physicians were more likely to communicate with other healthcare professionals (adjusted OR = 4.24, 95 % CI 1.54 to 11.72; p = 0.005). Most of the respondents also agreed that patient-specific barriers were the main impediments to follow-up care.
CONCLUSION: This study provides insights into the various aspects of breast cancer survivorship care from the perspectives of oncology practitioners and shows that survivorship care is relatively inadequate in Asia. There is a need for new survivorship care models to meet the needs of Asian BCS and to complement the unique healthcare systems of Asia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved 168 women diagnosed with breast cancer. The inclusion criteria were age >18 years old, having histologically confirmed breast cancer, and being diagnosed between January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2012. The exclusion criteria were being illiterate and having cognitive impairment. For data collection patients' medical records and the Cancer Behaviour Inventory-Brief (CBI-B) Malay version questionnaire were used. Simple and multiple logistic regression methods were used to analyse the data.
RESULTS: Patients' mean (SD) age was 51.4 (10.8) years old. Most of the patients were Malays, married, diagnosed at stage 2 breast cancer (41%), and completed their breast cancer treatment. The mean score for self-efficacy for coping with breast cancer was 83.67 (95% CI: 81.87, 85.47). The significant factors positively correlated with self-efficacy for coping with breast cancer were higher educational background and a higher family income. However, factors such as a family history of breast cancer and breast surgery reduced the mean score of self-efficacy for coping with breast cancer.
CONCLUSION: The mean score of self-efficacy for coping with breast cancer in this study was moderate. Self-efficacy for coping with breast cancer in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia was not adequate among sufferers and improvement is needed probably by providing education to these patients.
METHODS: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was carried out among 370 female undergraduate students from January 2011 to April 2012 in two selected public universities in Malaysia. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group or the control group. The educational program was delivered to the intervention group. The outcome measures were assessed at baseline, 6, and 12 months after implementing the health educational program. Chi-square, independent samples t-test and two-way repeated measures ANOVA (GLM) were conducted in the course of the data analyses.
RESULTS: Mean scores of knowledge on breast cancer (p<0.003), knowledge on breast self examination (p<0.001), benefits of BSE (p<0.00), barrier of BSE (0.01) and confidence of BSE practice (p<0.00) in the intervention group had significant differences in comparison with those of the control group 6 and 12 months after the intervention. Also, among those who never practiced BSE at baseline, frequency of BSE practice increased 6 and 12 months after the intervention (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: The Breast Health Awareness program based on health the belief model had a positive effect on knowledge of breast cancer and breast self-examination and practice of BSE among females in Malaysia.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ANZCTR clinical trial registry ( ACTRN12616000831482 ), retrospectively registered on Jun 23, 2016 in ANZCTR.org.au.
METHODS: Breast cancer patients were recruited from three Malaysian hospitals between June and November 2017. We compared the proportion of patients who rated PROs as very important (scored 7-9 on a 9-point Likert scale) between Malaysian patients and data collected from patients in HICs via the ICHOM questionnaire development process, using logistic regression. A two-step cluster analysis explored differences in PROs among Malaysian patients.
RESULTS: The most important PROs for both cohorts were survival, overall well-being, and physical functioning. Compared with HIC patients (n = 1177), Malaysian patients (n = 969) were less likely to rate emotional (78% vs 90%), cognitive (76% vs 84%), social (72% vs 81%), and sexual (30% vs 56%) functioning as very important outcomes (P breast reconstructive surgery, were more likely to rate body image and satisfaction with the breast as very important outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Taking into account the differences in PROs by cultural and socioeconomic settings could improve patient expectation of services and refine the assessment of cancer care outcomes.