MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study adapted and translated the Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (VHS) developed by the WHO SAGE Working Group. The scale underwent a sequential validation process, including back-back translation, content, face, and construct validity for Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). The reliability was tested using internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha composite reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE)).
RESULTS: The data for EFA and CFA were completed by a separate sample of 125 and 300 HCWs, respectively. The EFA analysis of the C19-VHS-M scale was unidimensional with 10 items. A further CFA analysis revealed a uniform set of nine items with acceptable goodness fit indices (comparative fit index = 0.997, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.995, incremental fit index = 0.997, chi-squared/degree of freedom = 1.352, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.034). The Cronbach's alpha, CR and AVE results were 0.953, 0.95 and 0.70, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire was valid and reliable for use in the Malay language.
METHODS: The questionnaire comprised development and validation stages. The development phase encompassed a literature review, expert panel review, focus-group testing, and evaluation. The validation phase consisted of exploratory and confirmatory parts to verify the psychometric properties of the questionnaire. A total of 214 and 759 participants were recruited from two Malaysian states, Kelantan and Selangor respectively, for the validation phase. The participants comprised urban and rural communities with a high reported incidence of leptospirosis. The knowledge section of the validation phase utilized item response theory (IRT) analysis. The attitude and belief sections utilized exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).
RESULTS: The development phase resulted in a questionnaire that included four main sections: knowledge, attitude, belief, and practice. In the exploratory phase, as shown by the IRT analysis of knowledge about leptospirosis, the difficulty and discrimination values of the items were acceptable, with the exception of two items. Based on the EFA, the psychometric properties of the attitude, belief, and practice sections were poor. Thus, these sections were revised, and no further factor analysis of the practice section was conducted. In the confirmatory stage, the difficulty and discrimination values of the items in the knowledge section remained within the acceptable range. The CFA of the attitude section resulted in a good-fitting two-factor model. The CFA of the belief section retained low number of items, although the analysis resulted in a good fit in the final three-factor model.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the IRT analysis and factor analytic evidence, the knowledge and attitude sections of the KABP questionnaire on leptospirosis were psychometrically valid. However, the psychometric properties of the belief section were unsatisfactory, despite being revised after the initial validation study. Further development of this section is warranted in future studies.
AIM: This study aimed to compare the incidence and associated risk factors of pDDIs among a public and private sector hospital in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.
METHOD: A retrospective cross-sectional study design was conducted to compare pDDIs among public and private sector hospitals from January 2023 to February 2023. Patients profile data for the full year starting from January 1 2022 to December 302022, was accessed All adult patients aged 18 years and above, of both genders, who currently have or have previously been diagnosed with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) were included. For assessing pDDIs, patient data was retrieved and checked using Lexicomp UpToDate® for severity and documentation of potential drug-drug interactions.
RESULTS: A total of 358 patients' data was retrieved (with n = 179 in each hospital); however, due to incomplete data, n = 4 patients were excluded from the final analysis. The prevalence of pDDIs was found to be significantly higher in private hospitals (84.7%) than in public hospitals (26.6%), with a p-value <0.001. Patients in the age category of 41-60 years (AOR = 6.2; p = 0.008) and those prescribed a higher number of drugs (AOR = 1.2; p = 0.027) were independently associated with pDDIs in private hospitals, while the higher number of prescribed drugs (AOR = 2.9; p = <0.001) was an independent risk factor for pDDIs in public hospitals. The majority of pDDIs (79.0%) were of moderate severity, and a significant number of patients (15.1%) also experienced major pDDIs, with a p-value <0.001. The majority of pDDIs had fair documentation for reliability rating in both public and private hospitals.
CONCLUSION: The prevalence of pDDIs was higher among CKD patients at private hospitals, and most of the pDDIs were of moderate severity. A considerable number of patients also experienced major pDDIs. The risk of experiencing pDDIs was found to be higher in older patients and among those prescribed a higher number of drugs.