Methods: The modified Delphi method was used to obtain the consensus. The initial indicators, based on a literature review, were evaluated and assessed by members of the expert panel through three rounds of repetition until the consensus was reached. The expert panel members were selected based on their knowledge of or expertise in pharmacy service performance and geographical considerations. Analysis of the expert panel consensus level was determined by calculating the mean and interquartile range.
Results: Fifteen expert panel members started the first round (93.7% of the 16 targets) with 12 of them (75%) completing the third round of the modified Delphi method. Three expert panel members were representatives of the Regency Health Office, and the others were pharmacist practitioners at primary health centres from three different regencies. The consensus results were 26 indicators of drug management, 19 indicators of clinical pharmacy services, and two indicators of overall pharmacy performance.
Conclusion: The consensus indicators for measuring drug management, clinical pharmacy services, and overall pharmacy performance can be used as a reference and standard to measure the quality of pharmacy services at primary health centres. Therefore, the measurement results are more relevant if compared between one and other studies.
Methods: This is a qualitative study with a phenomenological approach. It starts with a literature review using large databases, followed by interviews with 10 representative experts from medical schools in Indonesia.
Results: Based on the 10 studies retrieved, several components of faculty development were identified as the basis for the model. Ten experts gave input for the model. Components of the model can be grouped into: (i) content, which is materials that need to be delivered; (ii) process components, which depict aspects related to the preparation, execution and evaluation of sustainable faculty development; and (iii) components in the educational system that affect faculty development implementation.
Conclusion: A comprehensive review and development process has likely made this faculty development model suitable for medical schools in Indonesia. Breaking the model into components may help medical schools to prioritise certain aspects related to faculty development programmes.
METHODS: We searched the official Web sites and homepages of the responsible leading patient safety agencies of the three countries. We reviewed all publicly available guidelines, regulatory documents, government reports that included policies, guidelines, strategy papers, reports, evaluation programs, as well as scientific articles and gray literature related to the incident reporting system. We used the World Health Organization components of patient safety reporting system as the guidelines for comparison and analyzed the documents using descriptive comparative analysis.
RESULTS: Taiwan had the most incidents reported, followed by Malaysia and Indonesia. Taiwan Patient Safety Reporting (TPR) and the Malaysian Reporting and Learning System had similar attributes and followed the World Health Organization components for incident reporting. We found differences between the Indonesian system and both of TPR and the Malaysian system. Indonesia did not have an external reporting deadline, analysis and learning were conducted at the national level, and there was a lack of transparency and public access to data and reports. All systems need to establish a clear and structured incident reporting evaluation framework if they are to be successful.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TPR and Malaysian system, the Indonesian patient safety incident reporting system seemed to be ineffective because it failed to acquire adequate national incident reporting data and lacked transparency; these deficiencies inhibited learning at the national level. We suggest further research on the implementation at the hospital level to see how far national guidelines and policy have been implemented in each country.
OBJECTIVE: This research reduced depression level with Javanese gamelan therapy in chronic kidney failure patients' who undergo hemodialysis at RSUD KRMT Wongsonegoro Semarang.
METHOD: It was a quasi-experimental research with pretest-post-test without control group. The research was administered during March-May 2019 with 30 respondents taken as sample using the total sampling technique.
RESULTS: The research on 30 respondents showed that p-value=0.00,
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: RISE is a cluster randomised controlled trial among 12 settlements in Makassar, Indonesia, and 12 in Suva, Fiji. Six settlements in each country have been randomised to receive the intervention at the outset; the remainder will serve as controls and be offered intervention delivery after trial completion. The intervention involves a water-sensitive approach, delivering site-specific, modular, decentralised infrastructure primarily aimed at improving health by decreasing exposure to environmental faecal contamination. Consenting households within each informal settlement site have been enrolled, with longitudinal assessment to involve health and well-being surveys, and human and environmental sampling. Primary outcomes will be evaluated in children under 5 years of age and include prevalence and diversity of gastrointestinal pathogens, abundance and diversity of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes in gastrointestinal microorganisms and markers of gastrointestinal inflammation. Diverse secondary outcomes include changes in microbial contamination; abundance and diversity of pathogens and AMR genes in environmental samples; impacts on ecological biodiversity and microclimates; mosquito vector abundance; anthropometric assessments, nutrition markers and systemic inflammation in children; caregiver-reported and self-reported health symptoms and healthcare utilisation; and measures of individual and community psychological, emotional and economic well-being. The study aims to provide proof-of-concept evidence to inform policies on upgrading of informal settlements to improve environments and human health and well-being.
ETHICS: Study protocols have been approved by ethics boards at Monash University, Fiji National University and Hasanuddin University.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618000633280; Pre-results.