BACKGROUND: Provision of post stroke care in developing countries is hampered by discoordination of services and limited access to specialised care. Albeit shortcomings, primary care continues to provide post-stroke services in less than favourable circumstances. This paper aimed to review provision of post-stroke care and related problems among Family Medicine Specialists managing public primary health care services.
METHODS: A semi-structured questionnaire was distributed to 121 Family Physicians servicing public funded health centres in a pilot survey focused on improving post stroke care provision at community level. The questionnaire assessed respondents background and practice details i.e. estimated stroke care burden, current service provision and opinion on service improvement. Means and frequencies described quantitative data. For qualitative data, constant comparison method was used until saturation of themes was reached.
RESULTS: Response rate of 48.8% was obtained. For every 100 patients seen at public healthcentres each month, 2 patients have stroke. Median number of stroke patients seen per month is 5 (IQR 2-10). 57.6% of respondents estimated total stroke patients treated per year at each centre was less than 40 patients. 72.4% lacked a standard care plan although 96.6% agreed one was needed. Patients seen were: discharged from tertiary care (88.1%), shared care plan with specialists (67.8%) and patients who developed stroke during follow up at primary care (64.4%). Follow-ups were done at 8-12 weekly intervals (60.3%) with 3.4% on 'as needed' basis. Referrals ranked in order of frequency were to physiotherapy services, dietitian and speech and language pathologists in public facilities. The FMS' perceived 4 important 'needs' in managing stroke patients at primary care level; access to rehabilitation services, coordinated care between tertiary centres and primary care using multidisciplinary care approach, a standardized guideline and family and caregiver support.
CONCLUSIONS: Post discharge stroke care guidelines and access to rehabilitation services at primary care is needed for post stroke patients residing at home in the community.
An audit of hypertension management was done in October 2004 in nine general practice (GP) clinics. Two structure, ten process and two outcome indicators were assessed. Results showed that targets were achieved in only four indicators, i.e., weight recording (89%), BP monitoring (85.8%), follow-up interval not exceeding 6 months (87.9%) and mean diastolic BP (73.9%). The other indicators (hypertension registry, reminder mechanisms for defaulters, recording of smoking, height, fundoscopy, monitoring of lipid profile, blood sugar, ECG, renal function and achievement of target mean systolic pressure) showed adequacy percentages varying from 22.1 to 68.7. Out of the 1260 patients assessed, 743 (59%) achieved a mean BP < or = 140/90 (or < or = 130/80 mmHg with diabetes mellitus / renal insufficiency) in the last 3 recorded readings. There was a vast difference between individual clinics. Reasons for not achieving targets were discussed and remedial measures for implementation were recommended.
An audit on diabetic management was done in seven Perak general practice (GP) clinics in December 2001. The results showed inadequacies in nine out of eleven criteria assessed. Remedial measures were implemented. A second audit in March 2003, at the completion of the audit cycle, showed improvements in all the criteria used. All clinics established a diabetic register compared to 28.6% in the first audit and 57.1% of the clinics set up a reminder mechanism compared to 0% in the first audit. In the process of care, recording of weight, height, blood pressure; feet examination, fundoscopy, blood sugar monitoring and urine for albumin improved at the end of the audit cycle. In the only outcome criteria, the blood sugar control improved from 21.8% to 31.3%.
Comment on: Cannon B, Usherwood TP. General practice consultations - how well do doctors
predict patient satisfaction? Aust Fam Physician. 2007 Mar;36(3):185-6, 192. PubMed PMID: 17339988. https://www.racgp.org.au/afp/200703/15394
The Australian and Malaysian systems of general practice were examined and compared. The issues of similarity and difference identified are discussed in this paper. Quality clinical practice and the importance of compulsory vocational training prior to entry into general practice and continuing professional development is one important area. A move towards preventive health care and chronic disease management was observed in both countries. Practice incentive programmes to support such initiatives as improved rates of immunisation and cervical smear testing and the implementation of information technology and information management systems need careful implementation. The Medicare system used in Australia may not be appropriate for general practitioners in Malaysia and, if used, a pharmaceutical benefit scheme would also need to be established. In both countries the corporatisation of medical practice is causing concern for the medical profession. Rural and aboriginal health issues remain important in both countries. Graduate medical student entry is an attractive option but workforce requirements mean that medical education will need individual tailoring for each country. Incorporating nurses into primary health care may provide benefits such as cost savings. The integration model of community centres in Malaysia involving doctors, nurses and allied health professionals, such as physiotherapists, in a single location deserves further examination.
Good medicine labelling practice is vital to ensure safe use of medicines. Non-compliance to labelling standards is a potential source of medication errors. This study was intended to evaluate and compare compliance towards labelling standard for dispensed medications between community pharmacists and general practitioners in Penang, Malaysia. A total of 128 community pharmacies and 26 general practitioners' clinics were visited. Using 'Simulated Client Method' (SCM), data were collected on the medications dispensed upon presentation of hypothetical common cold symptoms. The medications dispensed were evaluated for labelling adequacy. Result revealed that majority of the dispensed medications obtained were not labelled according to regulatory requirements. However, general practitioners complied better than community pharmacists in terms of labelling for: name of patient (p<0.001), details of supplier (p<0.001), dosage of medication (p=0.023), frequency to take medication (p=0.023), patient's reference number (p<0.001), date of supply (p<0.001), special instructions for medication (p=0.008), storage requirements (p=0.002), and indication for medication (p<0.001). Conversely, community pharmacists labelled dispensed medications with the words "Controlled Medicine" more often than did general practitioners (p<0.001). Although laws for labelling dispensed medicines are in place, most community pharmacists and general practitioners did not comply accordingly, thereby putting patients' safety at risks of medication errors.
INTRODUCTION: Medical talks, newsletter circulars, scientific meetings and conferences, and interaction with members of the pharmaceutical industry, have become convenient means of carrying out continuing medical education (CME) for many busy doctors.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To study the perceived importance of these various CME activities, a self-completed posted questionnaire survey was conducted among registered practitioners of a densely populated urban state in Malaysia.
RESULTS: Of the 172 respondents [male, 77%; hospital-based, 37%; general practitioner (GP), 55%; private practice, 70%; respondent rate of 19.5%], most preferred local conferences and endorsements by local experts to their foreign counterparts. Meetings or conferences sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry were ranked similarly with those without such links, while the reputation of the pharmaceutical firms was of foremost importance. Among GPs (n = 95) and non-GPs (n = 77), medical society newsletters were rated significantly higher by GPs while overseas conferences were rated higher by non-GPs.
CONCLUSION: Our findings provide an important first look at this under-explored area among Malaysian doctors and described a high degree of acceptance for the involvement of the pharmaceutical industry in CME activities.