MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey on dentists' knowledge and their practices in prevention and early detection of oral cancer was conducted using a 26-item self-administered questionnaire.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: A response rate of 41.7% was achieved. The level of knowledge on early signs and risk habits associated with oral cancer was high and the majority reported to have conducted opportunistic screening and advised patients on risk habit cessation. Factors that influenced the dentist in practising prevention and early detection of oral cancer were continuous education on oral cancer, age, nature of practice and recent graduation. Notably, dentists were receptive to further training in the area of oral cancer detection and cessation of risk habits. Taken together, the study demonstrated that the dental clinic is a good avenue to conduct programs on opportunistic screening, and continuous education in these areas is necessary to adequately equip dentists in running these programs. Further, this study also highlighted knowledge deficits and practice shortcomings which will help in planning and developing programs that further encourage better participation of dentists in prevention and early detection of oral cancer.
SETTING: A sample of 1419 Malaysian community pharmacies with resident pharmacists.
METHOD: A cross-sectional nationwide survey using a self-completed mailing questionnaire.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pharmacists' views on generic medicines including issues surrounding efficacy, safety, quality and bioequivalence.
RESULTS: Responses were received from 219 pharmacies (response rate 15.4%). Only 50.2% of the surveyed pharmacists agreed that all products that are approved as generic equivalents can be considered therapeutically equivalent with the innovator medicines. Around 76% of respondents indicated that generic substitution of narrow therapeutic index medicines is inappropriate. The majority of the pharmacists understood that a generic medicine must contain the same amount of active ingredient (84.5%) and must be in the same dosage form as the innovator brand (71.7%). About 21% of respondents though that generic medicines are of inferior quality compared to innovator medicines. Most of the pharmacists (61.6%) disagreed that generic medicines produce more side-effects than innovator brand. Pharmacists graduated from Malaysian universities, twinning program and overseas universities were not differed significantly in their views on generic medicines. Additionally, the respondents appeared to have difficulty in ascertaining the bioequivalent status of the marketed generic products in Malaysia.
CONCLUSION: The Malaysian pharmacists' have lack of information and/or trust in the generic manufacturing and/or approval system in Malaysia. This issue should be addressed by pharmacy educators and relevant government agencies.