METHODS: Age-standardized mortality rates were calculated for 16 amenable causes of death in Singapore for six 5-year periods (1965-1969,..., 1990-1994), and for each of the three main ethnic groups for three periods (1989-1991, 1992-1994, 1995- 1997). Amenable mortality rates were divided into those which can be reduced by timely therapeutic care for 'treatable' conditions (e.g. asthma and appendicitis), or by primary preventive measures for 'preventable' conditions (e.g. lung cancer and motor vehicle injury).
RESULTS: Amenable mortality was higher in males (age-standardized rate 109.7 per 100 000 population) than in females (age-standardized rate 60.7 per 100 000 population). Amenable mortality declined by 1.77% a year in males and 1.72% a year in females. By comparison, the average yearly decline in non-amenable mortality was 0.91% in males and 1.17% in females. The decline in amenable mortality was largely due to 'treatable' causes rather than a decline in mortality due to 'preventable' causes of death. Amenable mortality was lowest for Chinese and highest for Malays. Over the recent 9-year period from 1989 to 1997, amenable mortality declined more in Chinese than in Malays and Indians. However, Indian females showed by far the sharpest decline, whereas Indian males, by contrast, showed an increase in amenable mortality, due to both treatable and preventable causes.
CONCLUSIONS: In line with findings from European countries, amenable mortality in Singapore declined more than non-amenable mortality. There were more significant gains in mortality outcomes from medical care interventions than from primary preventive policy measures. Gender and ethnic differences in amenable mortality were also observed, highlighting issues of socioeconomic equities to be addressed in the financing and delivery of health care.
METHODS: The 70-item QOLQA measuring five QOL domains (physical, psychological, independence, social and environmental) was administered to a random sample of 1363 school-children aged 10-15 years, representative of the ethnic composition of Singapore adolescents (Chinese 72%, Malays 20% and Indians 8%).
RESULTS: Indians reported the highest overall QOL (mean 3.71 +/- SD 0.54) compared to Chinese (3.59 +/- 0.43), p < 0.05, and Malays (3.58 +/- 0.44), p < 0.05. In particular, Indians had significantly higher psychological QOL scores (3.73 +/- 0.61) compared to Chinese (3.55 +/- 0.54), p < 0.01. On the other hand, Chinese scored highest on physical and independence domains (3.97 +/- 0.54), p < 0.01 compared to Malays (3.82 +/- 0.55). There were no statistically significant gender differences in QOL scores. QOL declined significantly from age 10 to 15 for overall score, psychological, physical (p < 0.01) and environmental (p < 0.05). Lower socio-economic status and the self-report of a significant health problem were significantly associated with lower overall QOL and most domains. These ethnic differences persisted after adjusting for differences in socio-economic and health status. Psychometric properties and known group construct validity appeared to be similar across different ethnic groups, but compared to Chinese (r = 0.39) or Malays (r = 0.39), Indians showed a higher correlation of psychological scores with physical score (r = 0.59) and with other domain scores.
CONCLUSION: Significant ethnic differences in reported adolescent quality of life among Chinese, Malays and Indians in Singapore that are independent of socioeconomic and health status suggest important cultural differences.
METHODS: Using data from a random population sample of noninstitutionalized Chinese, Malay, and Indian older adults 60 years old and older in Singapore (N = 1072), we modeled the dimensional structure of the 8-item IADL Scale using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and assessed its convergent and divergent validity using known group differences and strengths of association.
RESULTS: Factor analyses yielded two strong and reliable factors representing underlying physical and cognitive dimensions of IADL. The validity of the model was supported by the pattern of associations of the IADL with age, gender, education, self-reported health status, hospitalization, physical comorbidities, dementia and depression, and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. Notably, cognitive IADL showed a greater total effect on MMSE cognitive performance score than did physical IADL, with the effect of physical IADL on MMSE score mostly explained by cognitive IADL. Reasonably good cross-cultural validity was demonstrated among Chinese, Malays, and Indians, with strongest validity for Indians.
CONCLUSION: The eight-item IADL Scale has physical and cognitive domains and is cross-culturally applicable. The cognitive IADL domain taps a set of activities directly related to cognitive functioning.
METHODS: We recruited 164 healthy controls (HC) and 120 cognitively impaired (CI) subjects- 47 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 73 mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia participants, from four countries between January 2015 and August 2016 to determine the usefulness of a single version of the VCAT, without translation or adaptation, in a multinational, multilingual population. The VCAT was administered along with established cognitive evaluation.
RESULTS: The VCAT, without local translation or adaptation, was effective in discriminating between HC and CI subjects (MCI and mild AD dementia). Mean (SD) VCAT scores for HC and CI subjects were 22.48 (3.50) and 14.17 (5.05) respectively. Areas under the curve for Montreal Cognitive Assessment (0.916, 95% CI 0.884-0.948) and the VCAT (0.905, 95% CI 0.870-0.940) in discriminating between HCs and CIs were comparable. The multiple languages used to administer VCAT in four countries did not significantly influence test scores.
CONCLUSIONS: The VCAT without the need for language translation or cultural adaptation showed satisfactory discriminative ability and was effective in a multinational, multilingual Southeast Asian population.
METHODS: An adapted Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to develop the guidelines. This process involved detailed evaluation of the current scientific evidence paired with expert panel interpretation. Three categories of Clinical Practice Guidelines recommendations were developed: strong, conditional, and no recommendation.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Strong recommendations were (1) use a validated measurement tool to identify frailty; (2) prescribe physical activity with a resistance training component; and (3) address polypharmacy by reducing or deprescribing any inappropriate/superfluous medications. Conditional recommendations were (1) screen for, and address modifiable causes of fatigue; (2) for persons exhibiting unintentional weight loss, screen for reversible causes and consider food fortification and protein/caloric supplementation; and (3) prescribe vitamin D for individuals deficient in vitamin D. No recommendation was given regarding the provision of a patient support and education plan.
CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations provided herein are intended for use by healthcare providers in their management of older adults with frailty in the Asia Pacific region. It is proposed that regional guideline support committees be formed to help provide regular updates to these evidence-based guidelines.