METHODS: Descriptive study design, collecting quantitative data, among pre-selected public healthcare facilities. One healthcare professional from each participating facility, involved in ASPs, was invited to participate.
RESULTS: Overall 26 facilities from 8 provinces participated. Average compliance to the Framework was 59.5% for the 26 facilities, with 38.0% for community health centres, 66.9% for referral hospitals and 73.5% for national central hospitals. For 7 facilities compliance was <50% while 5 facilities were >80% compliant.
CONCLUSION: Although some facilities complied well with the Framework, overall compliance was sub-optimal. With the introduction of universal healthcare in South Africa, coupled with growing AMR rates, ongoing initiatives to actively implement the Framework should be targeted at non-compliant facilities.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, web-based survey administered between May and June, 2020.
RESULTS: Of 189 invited participants in 69 LMICs, we received 145 (77%) responses from 58 (84%) countries. The pandemic provides significant challenges to neonatal care, particularly in low-income countries. Respondents noted exacerbations of preexisting shortages in staffing, equipment, and isolation capabilities. In Sub-Saharan Africa, 9/35 (26%) respondents noted increased mortality in non-COVID-19-infected infants. Clinical practices on cord clamping, isolation, and breastfeeding varied widely, often not in line with World Health Organization guidelines. Most respondents noted family access restrictions, and limited shared decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: Many LMICs face an exacerbation of preexisting resource challenges for neonatal care during the pandemic. Variable approaches to care delivery and deviations from guidelines provide opportunities for international collaborative improvement.
DESIGN: Cross sectional study.
SETTING: Postgraduate primary care trainees in Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: 759 postgraduate primary care trainees were approached through email or hard copy, of whom 466 responded.
METHOD: A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess their awareness, knowledge and practice of dyslipidaemia management. The total cumulative score derived from the knowledge section was categorised into good or poor knowledge based on the median score, where a score of less than the median score was categorised as poor and a score equal to or more than the median score was categorised as good. We further examined the association between knowledge score and sociodemographic data. Associations were considered significant when p<0.05.
RESULTS: The response rate achieved was 61.4%. The majority (98.1%) were aware of the national lipid guideline, and 95.6% reported that they used the lipid guideline in their practice. The median knowledge score was 7 out of 10; 70.2% of respondents scored 7 or more which was considered as good knowledge. Despite the majority (95.6%) reporting use of guidelines, there was wide variation in their clinical practice whereby some did not practise based on the guidelines. There was a positive significant association between awareness and the use of the guideline with knowledge score (p<0.001). However there was no significant association between knowledge score and sociodemographic data (p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The level of awareness and use of the lipid guideline among postgraduate primary care trainees was good. However, there were still gaps in their knowledge and practice which are not in accordance with standard guidelines.
METHODS: Data of 3,100 Malaysian women with nonmetastatic breast cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2017 were analyzed. Adherence to the Malaysian Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Breast Cancer second Edition was measured. Outcomes comprised overall survival and event-free survival.
RESULTS: Guideline adherence for chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormonal therapy, and targeted therapy were 61.7%, 79.2%, 85.1%, and 26.2%, respectively. Older age was generally associated with lower adherence to guidelines. Compared with patients who were treated according to treatment guidelines, overall survival and event-free survival were substantially lower in patients who were not treated accordingly; hazard ratios for all-cause mortality were 1.69 (95% CI, 1.29 to 2.22), 2.59 (95% CI, 1.76 to 3.81), 3.08 (95% CI, 1.94 to 4.88), and 4.48 (95% CI, 1.98 to 10.13) for chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, and targeted therapy, respectively. Study inferences remain unchanged following sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSION: Our study findings appear to suggest that adherence to treatment guidelines that have been adapted for resource-limited settings may still provide effective guidance in improving breast cancer outcomes.