METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study was performed among young doctors less than 40 years old, working at King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, and Hospital Kuala Lumpur, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, using questionnaires and home sleep apnea testing (Apnealink™Plus). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of OSA (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5). The secondary objectives were to evaluate the prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) defined by AHI ≥5 + excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), sleep deprivation (the difference of weekend (non-workdays) and weekday (workdays) wake-up time of at least 2 h), EDS (Epworth Sleepiness Scale score ≥10), tiredness, and perception of inadequate sleep as well as to identify their predictors.

RESULTS: Total of 52 subjects completed the study. Mean age and mean body mass index (BMI) were 31.3 ± 4 and 23.3 ± 3.6, respectively. The prevalence of OSA and OSAS were 40.4 and 5.8 %, respectively. One third of OSA subjects were at least moderate OSA. Prevalence of sleep deprivation, EDS, tiredness, and perception of inadequate sleep were 44.2, 15.4, 65.4, and 61.5 %, respectively. History of snoring, being male, and perception of inadequate sleep were significant predictors for OSA with the odds ratio of 34.5 (p = 0.016, 95 % CI = 1.92-619.15), 18.8 (p = 0.001, 95 % CI = 3.10-113.41), and 7.4 (p = 0.037, 95 % CI = 1.13-48.30), respectively. Only observed apnea was a significant predictor for OSAS with odds ratio of 30.7 (p = 0.012, 95 % CI = 2.12-442.6). Number of naps per week was a significant predictor for EDS with the odds ratio of 1.78 (p = 0.007, 95 % CI = 1.17-2.71). OSA and total number of call days per month were significant predictors for tiredness with the odds ratio of 4.8 (p = 0.036, 95 % CI = 1.11-20.72) and 1.3 (p = 0.050, 95 % CI = 1.0004-1.61), respectively. OSA was the only significant predictor for perception of inadequate sleep with the odd ratios of 4.5 (p = 0.022, 95 % CI = 1.24-16.59).

METHODS: The curriculum development process involved a gap analysis, comprehensive literature review, and expert consensus through a modified RAND appropriateness method (RAM)/Delphi survey.

RESULTS: The curriculum offers two flexible tracks: a one-year program (Track A) and a two-year program (Track B), accommodating varied educational pathways and healthcare system structures across Asia. Key features of the curriculum include detailed learning outcomes, competency-based educational content, and recommendations for teaching and learning activities. The assessment strategy incorporates summative and formative methods, with standard setting and program evaluation guidelines. The curriculum also provides recommendations for program accreditation, fellow-faculty ratios, and funding considerations.