PATIENTS AND METHODS: The validity and reliability of the Mal-HRQOL-20 were assessed in patients with and without lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The reliability was evaluated using the test-retest method and the internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha. Sensitivity to change was expressed as the effect size in the score before and after intervention in additional patients with LUTS who underwent transurethral resection of the prostate.
RESULTS: The internal consistency was excellent; there was a high degree of internal consistency for each of the 20 items and for the overall score (Cronbach's alpha > or = 0.57 and 0.79, respectively) in the population study. The test-retest correlation coefficient for the 20 item scores was highly significant. The intra-class correlation coefficient was high (> or = 0.55). The sensitivity and specificity were high for the effects of treatment. There was a very significant agreement between scores before and after treatment across all domains in the treatment cohort, but not in the control group.
CONCLUSION: The Mal-HRQOL-20 is suitable, reliable, valid and sensitive to clinical change in the Malaysian population.
DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This cross-sectional study comprised 252 patients visiting HUSM. Patients were selected using the convenience sampling method. The PGQ (Bahasa Melayu version) had three main factors: during your visit; your care provider and overall assessment. Data were analyzed using the structural equation modeling.
FINDINGS: The exploratory factor analysis resulted in item reduction from 21 to 17, which contained four factors with eigenvalues greater than 1. Meanwhile, confirmatory factor analysis results showed that data fitted the model: χ2/df at 1.764, comparative fit index at 0.952, Tucker-Lewis index at 0.941 and root mean square error of approximation at 0.073. The average variance extracted value for the four factors was greater than 0.50, which indicated that PGQ convergent validity was met. Overall, PGQ produced good reliability with composite reliability score equals to 0.966. Four factors were reclassified as "during your registration," "hospital staff attitude," "doctor's attitude" and "overall assessment."
RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Patient satisfaction is an important and frequently used indicator for measuring healthcare quality; hence, a validated and reliable instrument is important for measuring patient satisfaction that leads to healthcare service quality assessment.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Validated PGQ provides some useful information for doctors, medical assistants, nurses and staff in the emergency department to help them become more prominent and efficient in their role as healthcare providers.
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Validated PGQ will help healthcare providers to deliver the best and exceptional care toward emergency patient, and thus improve their quality of work life. The findings in this study can be used as a guide or as baseline data for further research in this area.
ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The PQG (Bahasa Melayu version) was confirmed as a reliable and valid instrument for measuring patient satisfaction. This research is the first PGQ validation study in Southeast Asia, specifically focusing on Malaysian respondents.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity and reliability of the PPCI for physicians in Malaysia.
SETTING: An urban tertiary hospital in Malaysia.
METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from June to August 2014. Doctors were grouped as either a "collaborator" or a "non-collaborator". Collaborators were doctors who regularly worked with one particular clinical pharmacist in their ward, while non-collaborators were doctors who interacted with any random pharmacist who answered the general pharmacy telephone line whenever they required assistance on medication-related enquiries, as they did not have a clinical pharmacist in their ward. Collaborators were firstly identified by the clinical pharmacist he/she worked with, then invited to participate in this study through email, as it was difficult to locate and approach them personally. Non-collaborators were sampled conveniently by approaching them in person as these doctors could be easily sampled from any wards without a clinical pharmacist. The PPCI for physicians was administered at baseline and 2 weeks later.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Validity (face validity, factor analysis and discriminative validity) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) of the PPCI for physicians.
RESULTS: A total of 116 doctors (18 collaborators and 98 non-collaborators) were recruited. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the PPCI for physicians was a 3-factor model. The correlation of the mean domain scores ranged from 0.711 to 0.787. "Collaborators" had significantly higher scores compared to "non-collaborators" (81.4 ± 10.1 vs. 69.3 ± 12.1, p < 0.001). The Cronbach alpha for the overall PPCI for physicians was 0.949, while the Cronbach alpha values for the individual domains ranged from 0.877 to 0.926. Kappa values at test-retest ranged from 0.553 to 0.752.
CONCLUSION: The PPCI for physicians was a valid and reliable measure in determining doctors' views about collaborative working relationship with pharmacists, in Malaysia.
METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study conducted among Malaysian adults in three northern states of Malaysia. A pre-developed questionnaire consisting of both the EQ-5D and SF-12 items was used for data collection. Concurrent, convergent, and known group validity of EQ-5D were assessed against SF-12 and several known relationships with participants' demographic and illness characteristics.
RESULTS: A total of 596 Malaysians participated in the study. The mean EQ-5D score was 0.93 (SD = 0.13), while the mean physical component score (PCS-12) and mental component score (MCS-12) scores were 48.9 (SD = 7.4) and 49.1 (SD = 8.0), respectively. Participants with a current medical problem had lower PCS-12 and MCS-12 scores and reported more problems with all of the EQ-5D dimensions; they also had lower EQ-5D and EQ-VAS scores (P < 0.05). Convergent validity was supported by a moderately positive correlation between EQ-5D and EQ-VAS with MCS-12 and PCS-12 scores; moreover, the stronger effect sizes between PCS-12 and the physical dimensions of EQ-5D as well as between MCS-12 with anxiety/depression scores further supported the convergent validity of EQ-5D. Responses to the EQ-5D dimensions only supported two of the four known group validity hypotheses of higher quality of life among individuals who are better educated and no medical problem. No association was found between income and gender with EQ-5D score.
CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated acceptable construct validity of the EQ-5D among the Malaysian population.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey using the EQ-5D-3L instrument was conducted between May to September 2018 across various public hospitals in Malaysia. Using a multi-stage sampling, patients diagnosed with TDT and receiving iron chelating therapy were sampled. The findings on the EQ-5D-3L survey were converted into utility values using local tariff values. A two-part model was used to examine and derive the HSUVs associated with the treatment and complications of iron overload in TDT.
RESULTS: A total of 585 patients were surveyed. The unadjusted mean (SD) EQ-5D-3L utility value for TDT patients were 0.893 (0.167) while mean (SD) EQ VAS score was 81.22 (16.92). Patients who had more than two iron overload complications had a significant decline in HRQoL. Patients who were on oral monotherapy had a higher utility value of 0.9180 compared to other regimen combinations.
CONCLUSION: Lower EQ-5D-3L utility values were associated with patients who developed iron overload complications and were on multiple iron chelating agents. Emphasizing compliance to iron chelating therapy to prevent the development of complications is crucial in the effort to preserve the HRQoL of TDT patients.
METHODS: Patients having migraine for more than six months attending the Neurology Clinic, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia, were recruited. Standard forward and back translation procedures were used to translate and adapt the MIDAS questionnaire to produce the Bahasa Melayu version. The translated Malay version was tested for face and content validity. Validity and reliability testing were further conducted with 100 migraine patients (1st administration) followed by a retesting session 21 days later (2nd administration).
RESULTS: A total of 100 patients between 15 and 60 years of age were recruited. The majority of the patients were single (66%) and students (46%). Cronbach's alpha values were 0.84 (1st administration) and 0.80 (2nd administration). The test-retest reliability for the total MIDAS score was 0.73, indicating that the MIDAS-M questionnaire is stable; for the five disability questions, the test-retest values ranged from 0.77 to 0.87.
CONCLUSION: The MIDAS-M questionnaire is comparable with the original English version in terms of validity and reliability and may be used for the assessment of migraine in clinical settings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey of the tutors who had used the instrument was conducted to determine whether the assessment instrument or form was user-friendly. The 4 competencies assessed, using a 5-point rating scale, were (1) participation and communication skills, (2) cooperation or team-building skills, (3) comprehension or reasoning skills and (4) knowledge or information-gathering skills. Tutors were given a set of criteria guidelines for scoring the students' performance in these 4 competencies. Tutors were not attached to a particular PBL group, but took turns to facilitate different groups on different case or problem discussions. Assessment scores for one cohort of undergraduate medical students in their respective PBL groups in Year I (2003/2004) and Year II (2004/2005) were analysed. The consistency of scores was analysed using intraclass correlation.
RESULTS: The majority of the tutors surveyed expressed no difficulty in using the instrument and agreed that it helped them assess the students fairly. Analysis of the scores obtained for the above cohort indicated that the different raters were relatively consistent in their assessment of student performance, despite a small number consistently showing either "strict" or "indiscriminate" rating practice.
CONCLUSION: The instrument designed for the assessment of student performance in the PBL tutorial classroom setting is user-friendly and is reliable when used judiciously with the criteria guidelines provided.