Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was designed, and a self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 106 respondents. The survey comprised four sections including sociodemographic, knowledge, attitude, and practice.
Results: Total percentage scores for KAP for FH were 86.06%, 32.40%, and 19.91%, respectively, whereas the KAP scores for DS were 89.36%, 34.26%, and 19.94%, respectively. This study revealed that the respondents had good knowledge but poor attitude and practice toward FP. Total mean percentage of KAP scores for DS was higher than FH. Besides, no significant difference was observed in KAP toward FP across different genders, age, education, and income levels among FH. However, for DS, significant difference (p = 0.008) was observed in knowledge toward FP between genders. Significant association (p = 0.048) was also reported in practice toward FP with age among DS. This study also found a significant association between knowledge and attitude (p = 0.032) and knowledge and practice (p = 0.017) toward FP among FH.
Conclusion: Nevertheless, among DS, no significant association was observed between knowledge, attitude and practice toward FP. The findings may help them to plan effective methods to promote better understanding about FP and improving their knowledge and awareness.
Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted from August 2019 to November 2019. The community pharmacies, clinical and academic settings in Karachi were approached for gathering the responses of pharmacists towards BSMs and interchangeable products using a 30-item survey form. Pearson correlation and independent sample t-test were used to identify the relationship among independent variables and the responses, considering p values <0.05 as statistically significant.
Results: Overall, there were 305 survey forms used with a response rate of 87.14%. More than 80% of the respondents have good knowledge about the definition, characteristics, safety and efficacy, compatibility, cost issues, and utilization of BSMs. Around half of the respondents (48.9%, [95% CI 46.6-51.2]) were confident in using BSMs in clinical practice. However, they were concerned about the BSM's safety profile (45.2%, [95% CI 42.1-48.3]), quality (30.2%, [95% CI 28.3-32.1]), and efficacy issues (32.3%, [95% CI 31.2-37.5]).
Conclusion: The findings revealed that pharmacists were well informed about the BSMs. However, some of the responses to the attitude demonstrated a lack of understanding of the application of that knowledge. The respondents persuaded that advanced patterns of diseases, product marketing stipulations, and need for better patient care drives higher demand for developing BSMs and were enthusiastic about gaining more insight to integrate BSMs into routine clinical practice.
METHODS: A community-based cross-sectional survey was conducted between January and May 2016 in Selangor state of Malaysia. A two-stage cluster random sampling design was used and one adult member of selected households was interviewed face-to-face. Logistic regression was used to estimate the differences in knowledge and awareness between groups.
RESULTS: A total of 764 households completed the interviews and were included in the final analysis. Only 36.9 and 38.8% of the participants had good knowledge and awareness, respectively. The factors associated with good knowledge were being in the 35-44 year age group, Malay ethnicity, high educational attainment and high family income. Being Chinese, being older and having high educational attainment were determinants of having good awareness towards HepB. Participants who had good knowledge were 2.5 times more likely to also have good awareness (OR: 2.41, 95% CI: 1.78-3.26, p
METHODS: A total of 1598 questionnaires were posted to all female staff, aged 35 years and above. Their knowledge on breast cancer, practice of BSE and detection rate of breast abnormality as confirmed by CBE was determined.
RESULTS: The response rate for this study was 45 percent (714 respondents). The rate of respondents having awareness on breast cancer was 98.7 percent. Eighty four percent (598) of the respondents had performed BSE in their lifetime. However, in only 41% was it regular at the recommended time. Forty seven percent (334) had undergone CBE at least once in a lifetime but only 26% (185) had CBE at least once in the past 3 years, while 23% (165) had had a mammogram. There was a significant relationship between CBE and BSE whereby those who had CBE were twice more likely to do BSE. Nineteen percent (84 respondents) of those who did BSE claimed they had detected a breast lump. Of these, 87% (73) had gone for CBE and all were confirmed as such.
CONCLUSION: BSE is still relevant as a screening tool of breast cancer since those who detect breast lump by BSE will most probably go for further check up. CBE should be done to all women, especially those at highest risk of breast cancer, to encourage and train for BSE.