OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the preferences of Malaysian cancer patients regarding the communication of bad news.
METHODOLOGY: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in the Oncology clinic of a tertiary teaching hospital. Two hundred adult cancer patients were recruited via purposive quota sampling. They were required to complete the Malay language version of the Measure of Patients' Preferences (MPP-BM) with minimal researcher assistance. Their responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. Association between demographic characteristics and domain scores were tested using non-parametric statistical tests.
RESULTS: Nine items were rated by the patients as essential: "Doctor is honest about the severity of my condition", "Doctor describing my treatment options in detail", "Doctor telling me best treatment options", Doctor letting me know all of the different treatment options", "Doctor being up to date on research on my type of cancer", "Doctor telling me news directly", "Being given detailed info about results of medical tests", "Being told in person", and "Having doctor offer hope about my condition". All these items had median scores of 5/5 (IQR:4-5). The median scores for the three domains were: "Content and Facilitation" 74/85, "Emotional Support" 23/30 and "Structural and Informational Support" 31/40. Ethnicity was found to be significantly associated with scores for "Content and Facilitation" and "Emotional Support". Educational status was significantly associated with scores for "Structural and Informational Support".
CONCLUSION: Malaysian cancer patients appreciate the ability of the doctor to provide adequate information using good communication skills during the process of breaking bad news. Provision of emotional support, structural support and informational support were also highly appreciated.
METHOD: Structured interviews with community pharmacists. Informed consent was obtained and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Content analysis of themes on awareness of ADR reporting, reporting activities, attitudes and views on patient reporting.
RESULTS: All pharmacists claimed to have some knowledge of a reporting system but only one had submitted a report directly to the regulatory authority. Despite the low level of reporting activities, all participants agreed that it was part of their professional obligation to report an ADR. Most participants were not aware of the direct patient reporting scheme and were skeptical about its success. Lack of awareness and patients' limited knowledge about their medications were viewed as barriers to patient reporting. Local attitudinal issues including pharmacists' attitude towards ADR reporting were described as possible contributing factors.
CONCLUSION: Community pharmacists have an important role in reporting ADRs. Many Malaysian patients are still perceived to be ill-informed of their medications, an important determinant to the success of patient reporting. There is a need for further training about ADRs and ADR reporting for health professionals and further education for patients.
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.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of social media as an educational medium to effectively translate emerging research evidence into clinical practice.
METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods approach. Evidence-based practice points were delivered via social media platforms. The primary outcomes of attitude, knowledge, and behavior change were assessed using a preintervention/postintervention evaluation, with qualitative data gathered to contextualize the findings.
RESULTS: Data were obtained from 317 clinicians from multiple health disciplines, predominantly from the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, India, and Malaysia. The participants reported an overall improvement in attitudes toward social media for professional development (Phealth professionals, fostering their use of research evidence, and changing their clinical behaviors by translating new research evidence into clinical practice.
AIMS: To evaluate the evidence relating to attitudes towards PEG feeding and to determine potential barriers to the acceptance of PEG tube feeding.
METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and CINAHL databases. The search for the studies was performed without restrictions by using the terms "PEG", "percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy", "enteral feeding", "attitude", "perception" and "opinion". Qualitative and quantitative studies were included. Quality of studies was assessed with the Alberta checklists.
RESULTS: From 981 articles, 17 articles were included in the final analysis. Twelve qualitative and four quantitative studies were considered of good quality. Seven of the 14 studies reported positive attitudes towards PEG. Three major themes were identified in terms of barriers to PEG feeding: lack of choice (poor knowledge, inadequate competency and skills, insufficient time given, not enough information given, lack of guidelines or protocol, resource constraints), confronting mortality (choosing life or death, risk of procedure) and weighing alternatives (adapting lifestyle, family influences, attitudes of healthcare professionals (HCPs), fear and anxiety).
CONCLUSIONS: Only half of the reviewed studies reported positive perceptions towards PEG feeding. The themes identified in our systematic review will guide the development of interventions to alter the current attitudes and barriers towards PEG tube feeding.
METHODS: All final-year students registered for 2013/2014 across 11 dental schools in Malaysia were invited to participate in a self-administered questionnaire (n = 530). The instrument explored short- and long-term career expectations, influences and students' background using a mix of open- and closed-ended questions. The chi-square test was used for comparison according to student and school characteristics.
RESULTS: Three-hundred and fifty-six (83%) students, across eight schools, completed the questionnaire. In the short term, undertaking specialist training (46%) was the most commonly cited career goal, and achieving financial stability (79%) was the greatest influence. In the long term, 59% planned to specialise (with a significant difference found according to ethnic group), and 67% considered working full-time, with men significantly more likely to do so than women (P = 0.036). More Malay students (90%) ranked childcare commitments as an important influence on the number of sessions they planned to work per week compared with Chinese students (75%) and Others (74%; P = 0.001). Work-life balance (95%) and high income/financial security (95%) were the main influences on respondents' long-term goals.
CONCLUSION: There was a high level of interest in specialisation and a desire to achieve financial stability and work-life balance in the group of dental students who responded to the survey. Long-term career expectations varied according to student but not according to school characteristics.