OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a brief intervention for smoking cessation using the '5A' model with self-help materials compared to using self-help materials alone.
METHODS: This randomised controlled trial was conducted at the Primary Care Clinic at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) between June and October 2009. Subjects were all current smokers aged 18 years and above. A total of 208 subjects were recruited and randomised into two groups. Subjects in the intervention group were given a brief intervention based on the '5A' model with selfhelp materials, while the control group received self-help materials alone. Subjects were later followed up at one and four months via telephone calls. The outcome measure was a self-reported attempt to quit smoking.
RESULTS: At one-month follow-up, 15/77 (19.5%) of the participants in the intervention group had attempted to quit smoking compared to 8/80 (10.0%) in the control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.09). At the four-month follow-up, 13/58 (22.4%) participants in the intervention group had attempted to quit smoking compared to 9/57 (15.8%) in the control group. Once more, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.37).
CONCLUSION: This study showed that there was no significant difference between a brief intervention using the '5A' model with self-help materials and using self-help materials alone for smoking cessation in a Malaysian primary care setting. However, these results do need to be treated with caution when taking into consideration the high dropout rate and bias in the study design.
METHODS: Teaching and Learning (T&L) activities were conducted virtually on e-learning platforms. The students' experience and feedback were evaluated after 15 weeks.
RESULTS: We found that while students preferred face-to-face, physical teaching, they were able to adapt to the new norm of e-learning. More than 60% of the students agreed that pre-recorded lectures and viewing videos of practical sessions, plus answering short questions, were beneficial. Certain aspects, such as hands-on practical and clinical experience, could never be replaced. The e-learning and study-from-home environment accorded a lot of flexibility. However, students also found it challenging to focus because of distractions, lack of engagement and mental stress. Technical problems, such as poor Internet connectivity and limited data plans, also compounded the problem.
CONCLUSION: We expect e-learning to prevail in future. Hybrid learning strategies, which includes face-to-face classes and e-learning, will become common, at least in the medical physics programme of the University of Malaya even after the pandemic.