MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women underwent self-sampling followed by gynecologist sampling during screening at two primary health clinics. Pap cytology of cervical specimens was evaluated for specimen adequacy, presence of endocervical cells or transformation zone cells and cytological interpretation for cells abnormalities. Cervical specimens were also extracted and tested for HPV DNA detection. Positive HPV smears underwent gene sequencing and HPV genotyping by referring to the online NCBI gene bank. Results were compared between samplings by Kappa agreement and McNemar test.

RESULTS: For Pap specimen adequacy, KSSD showed 100% agreement with gynecologist sampling but had only 32.3% agreement for presence of endocervical cells. Both sampling showed 100% agreement with only 1 case detected HSIL favouring CIN2 for cytology result. HPV DNA detection showed 86.2%agreement (K=0.64, 95% CI 0.524-0.756, p=0.001) between samplings. KSSD and gynaecologist sampling identified high risk HPV in 17.3% and 23.9% respectively (p= 0.014).

METHODS: The scale development involved three phases: i) generation of domains based on the literature, ii) generation of sub-domains based on literature review and Islamic panel survey, and iii) generation of items.

RESULTS: Preliminary version of IPM3P consists of 59 items was produced, representing three domains: Obligation (18 items), Practice (21 items), and Difficulty (20 items), and seven sub-domains ('Ibadah', 'Aqidah', 'Muamalat', 'Tasawwuf', 'Akhlak','Da'wah', and 'Sirah').

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire (content- and face-validated) survey was undertaken, classroom style, amongst final-year nursing students from selected Malaysian (n = 122, Response rate=97.6%) and Australian (n = 299, Response rate=54.7%) institutions. Quantitative data were analysed via Statistical Package for Social Science software (Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests, p ≤ 0.01).

RESULTS: Significantly more Malaysian nursing students, compared to those in Australia, reported having encountered patients with OH issues (98.4% vs. 82.9%), namely halitosis (87.7% vs. 62.2%), oral ulcers (63.1% vs. 41.1%), oral/dental trauma (36.9% vs. 21.1%) and caries in children (28.7% vs. 7.7%). Less than half of Malaysian and Australian nursing students reported that they received adequate OH training (48.4% vs. 36.6%, p ≤ 0.01), especially in detecting oral cancer (18.0.0% vs. 22.6%, p ≤ 0.01) and preventing oral diseases (46.7% vs. 41.7%, p ≤ 0.01). Students in both countries demonstrated positive attitudes and believed in their role in OH care. Most students agreed that they should receive training in OH, especially in smoking cessation and providing OH care for patients with special needs. They also opined that a standardized evidence-based oral hygiene protocol is needed.

METHODOLOGY: An audio-recorded, semi-structured qualitative phone interview was conducted with the heads of 42 nursing schools across Australia (n = 35) and Malaysia (n = 7) during the 2015 academic year. Qualitative data were analysed via thematic analysis. Quantitative data, wherever appropriate, were measured for frequencies.

RESULTS: The response rate was 34.2% (n = 12) and 71.4% (n = 5) for the Australian and Malaysian subjects, respectively. Findings revealed that although all the nursing schools measured provided didactic and clinical training in oral health, curriculum content, expected learning outcomes, amount of clinical exposure and assessment approach lacked consistency. Most nursing educators across both countries perceived an overloaded curriculum as a barrier to providing oral health education. Whilst educators demonstrated their support for training in this area of care, they expressed the need for an established national guideline that highlights the educational requirement for future nurses in oral health maintenance and their scope of practice.

Objective: This study aimed to explore the prevalence of pain and its treatment outcomes among adult cancer patients admitted to a palliative care unit in Sabah, Malaysia.

Methods: Of 327 patients screened (01/09/15-31/12/17), 151 patients with assessed self-reported pain scores based on the numerical rating scale of 0-10 (current, worst and least pain within the past 24 hours) upon admission (baseline), 24, 48 and 72 hours post-admission and discharge were included. Pain severity and pain score reductions were analysed among those who experienced pain upon admission or in the past 24 hours. Treatment adequacy was measured by the Pain Management Index (PMI) among discharged patients. The PMI was constructed upon worst scores categorised as 0 (no pain), 1 (1-4, mild pain), 2 (5-6, moderate pain), or 3 (7-10, severe pain) which is then subtracted from the most potent level of prescribed analgesic drug scored as 0 (no analgesia), 1 (non-opioid), 2 (weak opioid) or 3 (strong opioid). PMI≥0 indicated adequate treatment.

Results: Upon admission, 61.1% [95%CI 0.54:0.69] of 151 patients presented with pain. Of 123 patients who experienced pain upon admission or in the past 24 hours, 82.1% had moderate to severe worst pain. Throughout patients' ward stay until discharge, there was an increased prescribing of analgesics and adjuvants compared to baseline, excluding weak opioids, with strong opioids as the mainstay treatment. For all pain score types (current, worst and least pain within the past 24 hours), means decreased at each time point (24, 48 and 72 hours post-admission and discharge) from baseline, with a significant decrease at 24 hours post-admission (p<0.001). Upon discharge (n=100), treatment adequacy significantly improved (PMI≥0 100% versus 68% upon admission, p<0.001).