METHODS: Seventy-seven medical doctors and eighty nurses answered a self-administered questionnaire designed to capture demographic data and information regarding abbreviation use in medical practice. Comparisons were made between doctors and nurses with regards to frequency and reasons for using abbreviations; from where abbreviations were learned; frequency of encountering abbreviations in medical practice; prevalence of medical errors due to misinterpretation of abbreviations; and their ability to correctly interpret commonly used abbreviations.
RESULTS: The use of abbreviations was highly prevalent among doctors and nurses. Time saving, avoidance of writing sentences in full and convenience, were the main reasons for using abbreviations. Doctors learned abbreviations from fellow doctors while nurses learned from fellow nurses and doctors. More doctors than nurses reported encountering abbreviations. Both groups reported no difficulties in interpreting abbreviations although nurses reported often resorting to guesswork. Both groups felt abbreviations were necessary and an acceptable part of work. Doctors outperformed nurses in correctly interpreting commonly used standard and non-standard abbreviations.
CONCLUSION: The use of standard and non-standard abbreviation in clinical practice by doctors and nurses was highly prevalent. Significant variability in interpretation of abbreviations exists between doctors and nurses.
OBJECTIVE: The International Survey Informing Greater Insights in Opioid Dependence Treatment (INSIGHT) project aimed to assess aspects of OMT access and quality of care by surveying patients and users with opioid dependence, and healthcare professionals treating opioid-dependent patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a structured questionnaire, 50 patients who were currently receiving OMT (or had received OMT in the past 3 months) and 77 physicians were surveyed in Malaysia regarding the provision and quality of OMT.
RESULTS: Patients were predominately male and in their thirties. Nearly all patients (98%) reported currently receiving methadone liquid; almost half (48%) reported ever having received psychosocial counselling and only 14% had ever received buprenorphine-naloxone in the past. Most physicians reported they were treating their patients with OMT (77% on methadone and 15% on buprenorphine-naloxone), and 3% used psychosocial counselling alone. Although methadone maintenance doses were close to levels recommended by WHO guidelines, induction doses of methadone, and both induction and maintenance doses of buprenorphine were well below these levels in Malaysia.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that OMT implementation in Malaysia can be improved by providing patients with more education on treatment options, better access to available treatments, including abuse-deterrent formulations, and psychosocial support.