METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study design was used. Two different scales were used to measure the readiness for and perception of interprofessional learning; these were the 'Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale' and the 'Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale'. A convenience sampling method was employed. The sample was drawn from undergraduate students enrolled in years 1 to 5 of medical, dental, pharmacy and health sciences programme. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse the data.
RESULTS: The overall response rate was 83%. The students mentioned that shared learning with other healthcare professional students will increase their ability to understand clinical problems. The students also mentioned that such shared learning will help them to communicate better with patients and other professionals. The students preferred to work with individuals from their own profession. Participants from medical, dental, pharmacy, and health sciences had a difference in opinion about 'negative professional identity', a domain of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale. Based on the different year of study of the students, 'team work and collaboration', 'negative professional identity' and 'roles and responsibility' were the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale domains where students had a difference in opinion.
CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes and readiness towards interprofessional learning showed significant differences among students of various healthcare professions; these differences also depended on the students' year of study. Interprofessional learning should be incorporated in the curriculum of all healthcare professional programs, which may foster students to become competent healthcare providers and understand each profession's role.
METHOD: Following the European QI protocol, auditing and data extraction of medical records of consenting residents with dementia were conducted by trained auditors with relevant health care backgrounds. Detailed field notes by the auditors were also obtained to describe the characteristics of the participating care facilities, as well as key issues and challenges encountered, for each of the 12 QIs.
RESULTS: Sixteen residential care facilities in the seven Asia-Pacific sites participated in this study. Data from 275 residents' records revealed each of the 12 Qis' endorsement varied widely within and between the study sites (0%-100%). Quality of the medical records, family and cultural differences, definitions and scoring of certain indicators, and time-consuming nature of the QI administration were main concerns for implementation.
CONCLUSION: Several items in the European QIs in the current format were deemed problematic when used to measure the quality of psychosocial care in the residential aged care settings in participating Asia-Pacific countries. We propose refinements of the European QIs for the Asian-Pacific context, taking into account multiple factors identified in this study. Our findings provide crucial insights for future research and implementation of psychosocial dementia care QIs in this region.
METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed AAC were identified prospectively over a 12-month period (November 2011 to October 2012) by active surveillance through the Scottish Ophthalmic Surveillance Unit reporting system. Data were collected at case identification and at 6 months follow-up.
RESULTS: There were 114 cases (108 patients) reported, giving an annual incidence of 2.2 cases (95% CI 1.8 to 2.6) or 2 patients (95% CI 1.7 to 2.4) per 1 00 000 in the whole population in Scotland. Precipitating factors were identified in 40% of cases. Almost one in five cases was associated with topical dilating drops. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) at presentation ranged from 6/6 to perception of light. The mean presenting intraocular pressure (IOP) was 52 mm Hg (SD 11). Almost 30% cases had a delayed presentation of 3 or more days. At 6 months follow-up, 75% had BCVA of 6/12 or better and 30% were found to have glaucoma at follow-up. Delayed presentation (≥3 days) was associated with higher rate of glaucoma at follow-up (22.6% vs 60.8%, p<0.001), worse VA (0.34 vs 0.74 LogMAR, p<0.0001) and need for more topical medication (0.52 vs 1.2, p=0.003) to control IOP.
CONCLUSION: The incidence of AAC in Scotland is relatively low compared with the Far East countries, but in line with previous European data. Almost one in five cases were associated with pupil dilation for retinal examination.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of universal HLA-B*15:02 screening in preventing carbamazepine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in an ethnically diverse Malaysian population.
METHODS: A hybrid model of a decision tree and Markov model was developed to evaluate three strategies for treating newly diagnosed epilepsy among adults: (i) carbamazepine initiation without HLA-B*15:02 screening (current practice); (ii) universal HLA-B*15:02 screening prior to carbamazepine initiation; and (iii) alternative treatment [sodium valproate (VPA)] prescribing without HLA-B*15:02 screening. Base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses were performed over a lifetime time horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated.
RESULTS: Both universal HLA-B*15:02 screening and VPA prescribing were dominated by current practice. Compared with current practice, universal HLA-B*15:02 screening resulted in a loss of 0·0255 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of 707 U.S. dollars (USD); VPA prescribing resulted in a loss of 0·2622 QALYs at an additional cost of USD 4127, owing to estimated differences in antiepileptic treatment efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS: Universal HLA-B*15:02 screening is unlikely to be a cost-effective intervention in Malaysia. However, with the emergence of an ethnically diverse population in many other countries, this may render HLA-B*15:02 screening a viable intervention when an increasing proportion of the population is at risk and an equally effective yet safer antiepileptic drug is available.