METHODS: This was a cross sectional study involving 197 T2DM patients on insulin from two government primary health clinics in Gombak. Physician-patient interaction satisfaction was assessed using Skala Kepuasan Interaksi Perubatan (SKIP-11) consisting of 3 subdomains (Distress Relief, Rapport and Interaction Outcome). Medication adherence level was measured using a single item selfreport question. Data analysis for descriptive, inferential and multivariate analysis statistics were performed.
RESULTS: The mean age of the study participants was 57.12 (SD: 9.27). Majority were Malay, female, unemployed with mean BMI of 27.5. Majority reported full adherence (62.9%). High scores in the Interaction Outcome subdomain was associated with better adherence. Factors associated with high scores in this subdomain included patient education level, number of oral hypoglycaemic agent and type of insulin regime taken. This study also found that high scores in the Interaction Outcome domain is associated with lower HbA1c (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Physician-patient interaction satisfaction is an important factor in achieving better medication adherence which also leads to better glycaemic control in this group of patients. There is a need to identify strategies to improve satisfaction in this domain to improve patient adherence.
METHODS: This cross-sectional questionnaire study involved 329 patients with T2DM who received their follow up at a public primary care clinic. Patients were selected via systematic random sampling. Patients self-completed locally adapted versions of the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Social Support Survey and Diabetic Management Self Efficacy Scale (DMSES). The scores of both tools were analysed to determine the association and correlation between social support and self-efficacy.
RESULTS: The mean score for overall social support was 72.7±21.40 score range (0-100). "Affectionate support" was rated the highest averaged mean score at 78.31±23.71 (score range: 0-100). The mean DMSES score was 147.6±35.5 (score range :0-200), of which "medications" subscale was rated the highest with averaged mean scores 9.07±1.67 (score range: 0-10). Overall social support and self-efficacy were found to be weakly correlated (r=0.197, p<0.001). However, all subscales of social support were moderately correlated with "medications" subscale of self-efficacy.
CONCLUSION: Social support is significantly associated with patients' self-efficacy in handling their own medications.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence, potential causes and management of hyponatraemia and to identify factors associated with severity of hyponatraemia among older persons in a primary care setting.
METHODS: Electronic records were searched to identify all cases aged ≥60 years with a serum sodium <135mmol/l, attending outpatient clinic in 2014. Patients' medical records with the available blood test results of glucose, potassium, urea and creatinine were reviewed.
RESULTS: Of the 21,544 elderly, 5873 patients (27.3%) had electrolyte profile tests. 403 (6.9%) had hyponatraemia in at least one blood test. Medical records were available for 253, mean age 72.9±7.3 years, 178 (70.4%) had mild hyponatraemia, 75 (29.6%) had moderate to severe hyponatraemia. Potential causes were documented in 101 (40%). Patients with moderate to severe hyponatraemia were five times more likely to have a cause of hyponatraemia documented (p<0.01). Medications were the commonest documented cause of hyponatraemia (31.7%). Hydrochlorothiazide use was attributed in 25 (78.1%) of 32 with medication-associated hyponatraemia. Repeat renal profile (89%) was the commonest management of hypotonic hyponatraemia.
CONCLUSION: Whilst hyponatraemia was common in the clinic setting, many cases were not acknowledged and had no clear management strategies. In view of mild hyponatraemia has deleterious consequences, future studies should determine whether appropriate management of mild hyponatraemia will lead to clinical improvement.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional validation study among 159 T2DM patients attending a public primary care clinic in Selangor. The DMOQ English version underwent adaptation, translation, face validation and field testing to produce the Malay version. Psychometric analysis was performed using Exploratory Factor Analysis, internal consistency and testretest reliability.
RESULTS: The DMOQ domains were conceptually equivalent between English and Malay language. A total of 13 items and two domains were removed during the validation process (three items during the content validation, three items due to poor factor loadings, five items as they loaded onto two domains which were not interpretable, one item as it did not fit conceptually into the factor it loaded onto and one openended question as it did not fit into the retained domains). Therefore, the final DMOQ Malay version consisted of 21- items within five domains. The Cronbach alpha was 0.714 and the intraclass-correlation coefficient was 0.868.
CONCLUSION: The DMOQ Malay version is a valid and reliable tool which is consistent over time. It can be used to examine the perception of T2DM patients towards the risk of their offspring developing diabetes and possibility of intervention in Malay-speaking patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study conducted online, using Google FormTM recruited 207 Medical Officers from 14 public primary health centres, with a response rate of 74%. The Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Questionnaire for Family Physicians (KAPQFP) was used to assess PCPs' knowledge, attitude and practice in dementia care. Items in each domain were scored on a 4-point Likert scale, with scores ranging from 1 to 4. Each domain's mean score was divided by 4 and converted to a scale of 100, with higher scores indicating better knowledge, attitude and practice. Bivariate analyses were conducted to determine the factors associated with cognitive evaluation practice.
RESULTS: The overall mean practice score was 3.53±0.52 (88.3%), which is substantially higher than the mean score for perceived competency and knowledge of 2.46±0.51 (61.5%). The mean score for attitude towards dementia and collaboration with nurses and other healthcare professionals was 3.36±0.49 (84.0%) and 3.43±0.71 (85.8%), respectively. PCPs with prior dementia training showed better practice (p=0.006), as did PCPs with longer primary care work experience (p=0.038). A significant positive association was found between knowledge-practice ((rs=0.207, p=0.003), attitude towards dementia practice ((rs=0.478, p<0.001), and attitude towards collaboration with other healthcare professionals-practice (rs= 0.427, p<0.001). Limited time and inadequate knowledge regarding dementia diagnosis and cognitive evaluation tools were among the reasons cognitive evaluations were not performed.
CONCLUSION: PCPs demonstrated better practice of cognitive evaluation, as compared to their knowledge and attitude. Given that their perceived competency and knowledge on dementia diagnosis is low and is positively associated with their practice, it is crucial to implement a comprehensive dementia training to enhance their knowledge and confidence on early detection of cognitive decline and cognitive evaluation in order to achieve better dementia detection in primary care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This qualitative study involved five public healthcare clinics in the Kuching district with indepth interviews (IDI) conducted on 14 primary care doctors (PCDs). Semi-structured interviews and in-depth discussions were conducted via videoconferencing. One representative was selected from each clinic at initiation, followed by snowball method for subsequent subject selection until saturation of themes. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and analysis based on framework analysis principles via NVivo software. Themes were analysed deductively according to study objectives and evidence from literature.
RESULTS: Three main themes emerged from the IDI: (1) The perception of depression in elderly patients, (2) The perceived barriers to screening, and (3) The screening processes. Majority of the PCDs perceived depression as part of ageing process. Time constraints, lack of privacy in consultation rooms, dominant caregivers and failure to recognise recurrent somatic symptoms as part of depression influenced PCDs decision to screen. Screening was technically challenging for PCDs to use the DASS-21, which was not socio-culturally validated for local native population. Only 21.4% of respondents (3/14) reported screening at least three out 10 elderly patients seen over 1- month period. During the covid pandemic, due to the same human resource support and practices, most participants thought their screening for depression in elderlies had not changed.
CONCLUSION: Awareness of depression among PCDs needs to be re-enforced via continuous medical education programs to use appropriate screening tools, address infrastructure related barriers to optimise screening practices. The use of appropriate locally validated and socio-culturally adapted tool is vital to correctly interpret the screening test for patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CKD-CHECK (CKD-CHECK EGFR Chart in Kidney disease) is a toolkit that was developed to auto-generate patients' eGFR trend using a line graph, displaying the trend visually over a year. It identifies patients with rapid CKD progression, triggers the doctors to order appropriate tests (proteinuria quantification or renal imaging) and helps in decision making (continued monitoring at primary care level or referral to nephrologist). The toolkit was piloted among medical officers practising in a hospital-based primary care clinic treating patients with eGFR<60ml/min/1.73m2 using an interventional before-after study design from February to May 2022. In the preintervention period, the CKD patients were managed based on standard practice. The doctors then used the CKDCHECK toolkit on the same group of CKD patients during the intervention period. The feasibility and acceptability of the toolkit was assessed at the end of the study period using the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) questionnaires. All patients' clinical data and referral rate were collected retrospectively through medical files and electronic data systems. Comparison between the pre- and post-intervention group were analysed using paired t-test and McNemar test, with statistical significance p value of <0.05.
RESULTS: A total of 25 medical officers used the toolkit on 60 CKD patients. The medical officers found the CKD-CHECK toolkit to be highly acceptable and feasible in primary care setting. The baseline characteristics of the patients were a mean age of 72 years old, predominantly females and Chinese ethnicity. Majority of the CKD patients had diabetes mellitus, hypertension and dyslipidemia. The numbers of CKD rapid progressors was similar (26.7% in the preintervention group vs 33.3% in the post-intervention group). There were no significant differences in terms of proteinuria assessment and ultrasound kidney for CKD rapid progressors before and after the intervention. However, a significant number of CKD rapid progressors were referred to nephrologists after the use of CKD-CHECK toolkit (p=0.016).
CONCLUSIONS: CKD-CHECK toolkit is acceptable and feasible to be used in primary care. Preliminary findings show that the CKD-CHECK toolkit improved the primary care doctor's referral of rapid CKD progressors to nephrologists.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, retrospective study design. All patients who received vildagliptin in the Pharmacy Integrated Health System (PHIS) registry database from 2016 to 2021 were included as study samples. The exclusion criteria were being less than 18 years old and having type 1 diabetes mellitus. Patients' medical records were retrieved after sampling, and data were collected. One medical record was missing, thus SPSS analysis were performed on 144 vildagliptin users.
RESULTS: In total, 84 females (58.3%) and 60 males (41.7%) with a mean age of 62.1 (±10.1) years were analysed in this study. Mean HbA1c pre-therapy was 8.5 ± 2.1%; while posttherapy 6 months demonstrated a mean HbA1c of 7.9 ± 1.8%. Use of vildagliptin alone or as an adjunct was associated with a mean reduction of 0.6% in HbA1c (p = 0.01). Factors influencing this HbA1c reduction were advancing age, specifically individuals aged 62 years and older (p = 0.02), patients who are already receiving insulin therapy (p=0.00) and those who express a willingness to commence insulin treatment during the counselling session prior to initiating the treatment plan (p = 0.00). Reasons for vildagliptin initiation documented by prescribers were non-insulin acceptance (n = 59, 40.97%), frequent hypoglycaemia (n = 6, 4.1%) and non-compliance with medications (n = 23, 15.9%). There was no association between demographic, medical background and reason for starting vildagliptin variables and HbA1c reduction (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: This study showed that initiating vildagliptin alone or as an adjunct therapy significantly reduced HbA1c and is beneficial for uncontrolled diabetes patients. While advancing age, concurrent administration of insulin and the patients' willingness to accept insulin treatment prior to the commencement of therapy were the factors that influenced HbA1c reduction among patients receiving vildagliptin therapy, we recommend primary care providers prioritise all of the significant variables discovered before initiating vildagliptin for their patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at Klinik Kesihatan Bandar Kuantan, Kuantan, Pahang. Patients were selected using stratified random sampling, and 201 participants were selected. The selected participants were asked to fill up the self-administered validated questionnaires consisting of background characteristics and Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire 18 (PSQ-18). Data collection period was from March 2022 to August 2022. Descriptive analysis was used to describe the background characteristics of respondents and the score of patient satisfaction. Multiple linear regression was used to determine the factors associated with patient satisfaction while adjusting for cofounders.
RESULTS: A total of 201 eligible data points were analysed in the study. The respondent mean age was 47.1 ± 16.9. Most respondents were Malay (68.7%), having secondary education (54.2%) and predominantly from the B40 income class (88.1%). The overall mean patient satisfaction score was 3.83 ± 0.31. There were significant associations between overall satisfaction with patient education level (B = -0.144; 95% CI -0.246, -0.042; p = 0.006), waiting time (B = -0.371; 95% CI -0.534, -0.209; p = 0.001) and consultation duration (B = -0.154; 95% CI -0.253, -0.055; p = 0.0020). It was found that patients with secondary education were less satisfied compared to patients with primary education level on health care services they received. Meanwhile, those who were not happy with the waiting time and consultation duration showed less satisfaction with overall healthcare services.
CONCLUSION: Despite serving the most significant number of patients in Pahang state, most of the patient were satisfied by the health care services at Klinik Kesihatan Bandar Kuantan. However, it is recommended to improve the waiting time and the consultation time in this clinic.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective crosssectional study reviewing the medical records of patients seen by visiting nephrologists from January 2019 to December 2021 in Greentown Health Clinic. The study population are patients with CKD stage 3b, 4 and 5 who are followed up in Greentown Health Clinic. Universal sampling was done, a total of 87 patients reviewed at least once by the visiting nephrologist and with retrievable medical records were included in the study. Those whose medical records were irretrievable were excluded. Blood pressure, urine protein, fasting blood sugar (FBS), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), serum creatinine, eGFR and fasting lipid profile (FLP) pre- and post-visits were collected by reviewing patient medical records and laboratory results. The results were then analysed and compared using SPSS version 26.
RESULTS: The median age of patients in this study was 66 years of age, the majority were male patients (54%) and Malay ethnicity (62.1%). Absence of urine microalbuminuria pre and post referral remain the same (n = 11). During prenephrologist visits, a higher percentage of patients exhibited moderate (30-300 mg/g) and severe (>300 mg/g) increase in urine albuminuria (15.7% and 7.2%, respectively) compared to the post-referral period. In patients with significant urine protein pre-referral, patient group with urine protein 3+ showed the highest increment of 30.1% (n = 22), in comparison to 19.3% (n = 16) observed during prereferral. Statistically significant clinical outcomes between pre- and post-referral to the nephrologist include reduction of systolic blood pressure [141±15 mmHg versus 135 ±12 mmHg, p = 0.001] and diastolic blood pressure [median = 80 mmHg (IQR: 10) versus median=71 mmHg (IQR: 17), p < 0.001]. Similarly, total cholesterol [median = 4.4 mmol/L (IQR: 1.4) versus median = 4.0 mmol/L (IQR: 1.5, p = 0.001] and LDL [median = 2.5 mmol/L (IQR: 1.2) versus median = 2.2 mmol/L (IQR: 1.2), p < 0.001)] exhibited statistically significant differences between pre- and post-referral. However, HDL remained unchanged and other outcome variables showed no significant differences.
CONCLUSION: Incorporating nephrologist visits in primary care seems to have positive impact towards patient clinical outcomes. Results shown in this study can aid other primary care clinics in the decision to initiate nephrologist services in the primary care setting as a multidisciplinary approach to managing CKD patients.