METHODS: During a period when the 1999 WHO GDM criteria were in effect, pregnant women were universally screened using a one-step 75 g 2-h oral glucose tolerance test at 26-28 weeks' gestation. Women were retrospectively reclassified according to the 2013 criteria, but without the 1-h glycaemia measurement. Pregnancy outcomes and glucose tolerance at 4-5 years post-delivery were compared for women with GDM classified by the 1999 criteria alone, GDM by the 2013 criteria alone, GDM by both criteria and without GDM by both sets of criteria.
RESULTS: Of 1092 women, 204 (18.7%) and 142 (13.0%) were diagnosed with GDM by the 1999 and 2013 WHO criteria, respectively, with 27 (2.5%) reclassified to GDM and 89 (8.2%) reclassified to non-GDM when shifting from the 1999 to 2013 criteria. Compared to women without GDM by both criteria, cases reclassified to GDM by the 2013 criteria had an increased risk of neonatal jaundice requiring phototherapy (relative risk (RR) = 2.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32, 5.86); despite receiving treatment for GDM, cases reclassified to non-GDM by the 2013 criteria had higher risks of prematurity (RR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.12, 4.24), neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR = 3.42, 95% CI 1.04, 11.29), jaundice requiring phototherapy (RR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.04, 2.82), and a higher rate of abnormal glucose tolerance at 4-5 years post-delivery (RR = 3.39, 95% CI 2.30, 5.00).
CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of the 2013 WHO criteria, without the 1-h glycaemia measurement, reduced the GDM rate. Lowering the fasting glucose threshold identified women who might benefit from treatment, but raising the 2-h threshold may fail to identify women at increased risk of adverse pregnancy and future metabolic outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01174875 . Registered 1 July 2010 (retrospectively registered).
METHODS: Charts between January 1997 and December 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Charts between January 2014 and December 2014 were prospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: A total of 1249 and 148 charts were retrospectively and prospectively reviewed, respectively. The top causes of anterior uveitis (AU) were HLA-B27, idiopathic, and CMV AU. The top known causes of intermediate uveitis were tuberculosis, primary intraocular lymphoma, and sarcoidosis. The top causes of posterior uveitis were CMV retinitis, toxoplasmosis, and dengue maculopathy. The top causes of panuveitis were VKH, idiopathic panuveitis, tuberculosis, and Behçet disease. HLA-B27 and CMV AU were more frequent among Chinese (21% vs 9% (non-Chinese); p<0.001; 10% vs 5% (non-Chinese); p<0.001, respectively). Tuberculous uveitis was more frequent among Malays and Indians (12% (non-Chinese) vs 5% (Chinese), p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Different uveitis patterns were encountered among patients of different races.
METHODS: A total of 195 5- and 6-year-old preschoolers were recruited from children attending Hospital Selayang, Selangor, Malaysia, to test the app. Uncooperative children and those with visual acuity of >logMAR 0.6 were excluded. Results from parents and the screening doctor using the app (Lea symbols) to test visual acuity were compared to each other and to gold standard vision testing by an optometrist using the Lea symbols chart.
RESULTS: Children 5 years of age represented 46.7% of the study population. The mean age of parents was 37.27 ± 7.68 years. Bland-Altman scatterplot agreement between assessors mainly was within the 95% confidence interval for bilateral eyes screening. Parents obtained a sensitivity of 86.6% (right vision) and 79.5% (left vision) and specificity of 78.9% (right vision) and 71.8% (left vision). Parents took a mean of 191.2 ± 70.82 seconds for bilateral screening. The intraclass correlation coefficient between optometrist and parents in bilateral eyes screening was good (P 0.7, indicating high internal reliability of the app. Most parents (178/195 [91.3%]) strongly agreed on the app's acceptability and ease of use.
CONCLUSIONS: The AAPOS Vision Screening App used by parents is a promising tool for visual acuity screening among Malaysian preschool children and a reliable app for vision screening.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study on T2DM patients. Modest alcohol intake was defined as alcohol intake ≤ 21 units/week in men and ≤ 14 units/week in women. Significant hepatic steatosis was diagnosed on the basis of controlled attenuation parameter > 263 dB/m, while advanced fibrosis was diagnosed on the basis of liver stiffness measurement ≥ 9.6 kPa using M probe or ≥ 9.3 kPa using XL probe. Patients with liver stiffness measurement ≥ 8.0 kPa were offered liver biopsy.
RESULTS: Five hundred fifty-seven patients underwent transient elastography, and 71 patients underwent liver biopsy. The prevalence of modest drinking was 16.5%. Modest drinking was equally prevalent among ethnic Indians and Chinese at 22.9% and 23.3%, respectively, but uncommon among ethnic Malays at 1.7%. Modest drinkers were more likely to be male, smoked, and had significantly lower glycated hemoglobin, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, alkaline phosphatase, and platelet count. There was no significant difference in the prevalence of significant hepatic steatosis or advanced fibrosis based on transient elastography and steatohepatitis or advanced fibrosis between modest drinkers and nondrinkers. The prevalence of significant hepatic steatosis was higher among ethnic Malays and Indians compared with ethnic Chinese, but the Chinese did not have a lower prevalence of more severe liver disease.
CONCLUSION: Modest alcohol intake is not associated with higher prevalence of significant hepatic steatosis or more severe liver disease among patients with T2DM.
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.