METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the case records of patients with positive serology findings for syphilis in University Malaya Medical Center (UMMC) from January 2010 to December 2015. Serological positivity was defined as having a positive rapid plasma reagin (RPR) or Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL) with a confirmatory positive Treponema pallidum particle agglutination assay (TPPA). Treatment outcomes were divided into two, success or failure. Demographic and clinical characteristics associated with predictors of treatment failure were assessed using statistical package for the social science (SPSS). This study also included a neurosyphilis descriptive sub-study.
RESULTS: There were 637 patients identified with positive syphilis serology, but 258 patients were excluded as they did not meet the inclusion criteria. 379 patients were then taken for the demographic study; 14 patients (3.7%) were treated for neurosyphilis; 170 patients with complete data were included. In all 42/170 (24.7%) failed treatment, 12/170 (7.1%) had reinfection and 116/170 (68.2%) had treatment success. A final number of 158 patients were then taken and analyzed for predictors of treatment failure after excluding the 12 reinfection patients. Only low baseline RPR (<1:16) was found to be significant on multivariate logistic regression analysis (p value: 0.007, 95% CI: 1.42, 9.21).
CONCLUSION: Most of the patients were HIV positive and from the MSM (Men who have sex with Men) population. Low baseline RPR titre is a predictor of treatment failure.
DESIGN: Prospective analysis of all ocular trauma injuries presenting to the Department of Ophthalmology in UMMC from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2008.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 603 eyes of 546 patients were recruited for the study.
METHODS: All patients presenting to the department with ocular trauma injuries were assessed by an ophthalmologist. Data on the type and source of injury, demographic profile of the patients, and clinical presentation were documented using a uniform and validated datasheet.
RESULTS: Among eye injury cases, 481 patients (88.1%) were male, with a male-to-female ratio of 7.4:1. Of the patients, 412 (75.5%) were Malaysian while the remaining 134 (24.5%) were of non-Malaysian nationality. The average age was 31.5 years (range 1-81 years). A total of 238 injured eyes (43.6%) were work-related. The common sources of eye trauma include the use of high-powered tools (30.8%), motor vehicle accident (23.1%), and domestic accidents (17.7%). Only six patients (2.5%) reported to having used eye protective device (EPD) at time of their work-related injuries.
CONCLUSIONS: A major cause of preventable ocular injuries in Malaysia was work-related trauma. Ocular injuries can be reduced by the use of eye protection devices and the implementation of appropriate preventive strategies to address each risk factor. Effective training is an integral part of occupational safety and health, which should be made mandatory at the workplace. In addition, there should be a continual assessment of safety and health issues at the workplace. A long-term database of all ocular injuries in Malaysia is recommended, to aid research on a larger scale and the development of new preventive strategies for ocular injuries.
METHODS: A survey of 1000 patients and accompanying relatives, visiting general surgical and obstetrics and gynaecology clinics for matters unrelated to FI, was conducted at University Malaya Medical Centre between January 2009 and February 2010. A follow-up regression analysis of the 83 patients who had FI, to identify factors associated with health-seeking behaviour, was performed. Variables identified through univariate analysis were subjected to multivariate analysis to determine independence. Reasons for not seeking treatment were also analysed.
RESULTS: Only eight patients (9.6%) had sought medical treatment. On univariate analysis, the likelihood of seeking treatment was significantly higher among patients who had more severe symptoms (OR 30.0, p=0.002), had incontinence to liquid stool (OR 3.83, p=0.002) or when there was an alteration to lifestyle (OR: 17.34; p<0.001). Nevertheless, the only independently-associated variable was alteration in lifestyle. Common reasons given for not seeking treatment was that the condition did not affect patients' daily activities (88.0%), "social taboo" (5.3%) and "other" reasons (6.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Lifestyle alteration is the main driver of healthseeking behaviour in FI. However, the majority do not seek treatment. Greater public and physician-awareness on FI and available treatment options is needed.