METHODS: In-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with the intervention design team, healthcare providers and patients in two rounds during the implementation period. A total of 121 individuals in the two rounds, split into different groups, where some of the participants of the FGD were also interviewed individually. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis, with codes being organised into larger themes.
RESULTS: Themes that emerged from the data were around the process of FHT implementation and the advantages of the FHT, which included continuity of health care and improved quality of care. Patients and health care providers were receptive to the FHT concept, and took the effort to adapt the concept in the local settings.
CONCLUSIONS: The FHT concept implemented at 20 public primary health clinics has benefits appreciated by health care providers and patients. Addressing the viable shortcomings would better prepare the current primary healthcare system to scale up the FHT concept nationwide and enhance its feasibility and sustainability.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered with the National Medical Research Register, Ministry of Health Malaysia ( NMRR-17-295-34711 ).
METHODS: Using a universal sampling technique, 460 male patients aged 60 and above visiting an urban based public primary care clinic were recruited. An interviewer administered the questionnaire which used International Prostate Symptoms Score and International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire-Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms-Quality of Life.
RESULTS: The prevalence of any LUTS and clinically significant LUTS were 89.8% and 20.5%, respectively. Among the 385 participants who completed the study, only 41.8% had consulted a doctor for LUTS. Among those with moderate/severe symptoms only 57.6% had sought medical intervention. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that the presence of more than two comorbidities (P=0.004; odds ratio [OR], 4.695; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.632-13.508) and quality of life (P=0.002; OR, 1.271; 95% CI, 1.091-1.481) were independent factors significantly associated with seeking help.
CONCLUSION: Prevalence of LUTS among elderly men undergoing primary care is high, but more than half of the patients had not sought medical attention. Increasing comorbidities and impact on quality of life influenced elderly men with LUTS to seek help.
METHODS: A total of 207 elderly patients aged 60 years and above with chronic diseases attending a university-based primary care clinic were recruited via a systematic randomised sampling method from the clinic patient attendance registry. Respondents were assessed using self-administered online questionnaires distributed via mobile devices. The questionnaire assessed awareness, i.e. ability to correctly answer a self-reported questionnaire on basic dementia knowledge; (adapted from Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey 2010), risk of MCI; (using Towards Useful Aging (TUA)-WELLNESS screening questionnaire) and help-seeking behaviour. Bivariate analysis was used to determine factors associated with dementia awareness.
RESULTS: The response rate was 77.1%, with the majority of participants were females, Chinese and had secondary school education. 39.1% of participants were categorised as high risk of developing MCI. The majority (92.8%) had low dementia awareness and had never shared their concerns regarding dementia (93.2%) nor had any discussion (87.0%) on cognitive impairment with their physicians. Three factors had an association with total dementia awareness score, i.e., younger age group, higher risk of MCI and presence of cardiovascular diseases have significantly lower awareness score (p care doctors engaging with at-risk elderly patients to initiate discussion regarding dementia risk while managing modifiable risk factors i.e. hypertension control, diabetes, dyslipidaemia and obesity.
METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to obtain information from patients with gout under follow-up in primary care and doctors who cared for them. Patients and doctors shared their gout management experiences and views on implementing HLA-B*58:01 screening in primary care. Data were coded and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: 18 patients and 18 doctors from three different healthcare settings (university hospital, public health clinics, private general practitioner clinics) participated. The acceptability to HLA-B*58:01 screening was good among the doctors and patients. We discovered inadequate disclosure of severe side effects of allopurinol by doctors due to concerns about medication refusal by patients, which could potentially be improved by introducing HLA-B*58:01 testing. Barriers to implementation included out-of-pocket costs for patients, the cost-effectiveness of this implementation, lack of established alternative treatment pathway besides allopurinol, counselling burden and concern about genetic data security. Our participants preferred targeted screening for high-risk populations instead of universal screening.
CONCLUSION: Implementing HLA-B*58:01 testing in primary care is potentially feasible if a cost-effective, targeted screening policy on high-risk groups can be developed. A clear treatment pathway for patients who test positive should be made available.