METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The scoping review will be conducted based on the methodology developed by Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology, and Levac et al 's methodological enhancement. An experienced information specialist (HM) searched the following databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The search terms were both keywords in the title and/or abstract and subject headings (eg, MeSH, EMTREE) as appropriate. Search results were downloaded, imported and stored into a 'Refworks' folder specifically created for reference management. The preliminary search was conducted between 7 December 2017 and 14 December 2017. Quantitative methods using content analysis will be used to categorise study findings on factors associated with trust between patients, clients and healthcare providers. The collection of studies will be also examined for heterogeneity. Qualitative analysis on peer reviewed articles of qualitative interviews and focus group discussion will be conducted; it allows clear identification of themes arising from the data, facilitating prioritisation, higher order abstraction and theory development. A consultation exercise with stakeholders may be incorporated as a knowledge translation component of the scoping study methodology.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval will be obtained for the research project from the Institutional Review Board. The International Medical University will use the findings of this scoping review research to improve the understanding of trust in healthcare, in its endeavour to improve health services delivery in its healthcare clinics and hospitals, and in its teaching and learning curriculum. The findings will also help faculty make evidence based decisions to focus resources and research as well as help to advance the science in this area. Dissemination of the results of the scoping review will be made through peer-reviewed publications, research reports and presentations at conferences and seminars.
METHODS: A novel research instrument known as the rheumatoid arthritis knowledge assessment scale (RAKAS) which consisted of 13 items, was formulated by a rheumatology panel and used for this study. This study was conducted in rheumatology clinics of three tertiary care hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. The study was conducted in March-April 2018. Patients were recruited using a randomized computer-generated list of appointments. Sample size was calculated based on item-to-respondent ratio of 1:15. The validities, factor structure, sensitivity, reliability and internal consistency of RAKAS were assessed. The study was approved by the institutional Ethics Committee.
RESULTS: A total of 263 patients responded to the study. Content validity was 0.93 and response rate was 89.6%. Factor analysis revealed a 3-factor structure. Fit indices, namely normed fit index (NFI), Tucker Lewis index (TLI), comparative fit index (CFI) and root mean square of error approximation (RMSEA) were calculated with satisfactory results, that is, NFI, TLI and CFI > 0.9, and RMSEA 19 and difficulty index <0.95. Sensitivity and specificity of RAKAS were above 90%. The tool established construct and known group validities.
CONCLUSION: A novel tool to document disease knowledge in patients with RA was formulated and validated.
FUNDING: Pfizer.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional descriptive study that was conducted to evaluate perception and experience of pharmacists with the use of Internet-based medication information by their patients. During the study period, 200 pharmacists were approached to participate in the study using a paper-based survey to assess their perceptions and current experience with the use of Internet-based medication information by their patients. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean/standard deviation for continuous variables, and frequency/percentages for qualitative variables). Also, simple linear regression was utilized to screen factors affecting pharmacists' perception scores of the use of Internet-based medication information.
RESULTS: Among 161 recruited pharmacists, the majority (n = 129, 80.1%) reported receiving inquiries from patients about Internet-based medication information within the last year. Among them, only 22.6% (n = 29) of pharmacists believed that Internet-based medication information is somewhat or very accurate. Unfortunately, only 24.2% (n = 31) of them stated that they always had enough time for their patient to discuss their Internet-based medication information. Regarding pharmacists' perception of the use of Internet-based medication information by their patients, more than half of the pharmacists (>50%) believe that Internet-based medication information could increase the patient's role in taking responsibility. On the other hand, 54.7% (n = 88) of the pharmacists believed that Internet-based medication information would contribute to rising the healthcare cost by obtaining unnecessary medications by patients. Finally, pharmacists' educational level was found to significantly affect their perception scores toward patient use of Internet-based medication information where those with higher educational level showed lower perception score (r = -0.200, P-value = 0.011).
CONCLUSION: Although pharmacists felt that usage of Internet-based data by patients is beneficial, they also have believed that it has a negative impact in terms of rising the healthcare cost, and it promotes unnecessary fear or concern about medications. We suggest that pharmacists be trained on principles of critical appraisal to become professional in retrieval information on the Internet that might improve their delivery of healthcare information and their recommendations to patients.
METHODS: CINAHL and Medline (via EBSCOhost), Google Scholar, PubMed, ProQuest, Sage Journals, and Science Direct were searched. Both quantitative and/or qualitative studies in the English language were included. Intervention studies and studies focusing on HL assessment tools and prevalence of low HL were excluded. The risk of biasness reduced with the involvement of two reviewers independently assessing study eligibility and quality.
RESULTS: A total of 30 studies were included, which consist of 19 quantitative, 9 qualitative, and 2 mixed-method studies. Out of 17 studies, 13 reported deficiency of HL-related knowledge among healthcare providers and 1 among patients. Three studies showed a positive attitude of healthcare providers towards learning about HL. Another three studies demonstrated patients feel shame exposing their literacy and undergoing HL assessment. Common HL communication techniques reported practiced by healthcare providers were the use of everyday language, teach-back method, and providing patients with reading materials and aids, while time constraint was the most reported HL perceived barriers by both healthcare providers and patients.
CONCLUSION: Significant gaps exists in HL knowledge among healthcare providers and patients that needs immediate intervention. Such as, greater effort placed in creating a health system that provides an opportunity for healthcare providers to learn about HL and patients to access health information with taking consideration of their perceived barriers.
METHODS: The study enrolled 110 participants (age: M = 46.85, SD = 11.23; female: 55.45%) undergoing hospital treatment, of whom 87 were included in the pre-post analysis. Participants completed a German translation of MAIA-2 and the Beck Depression Inventory-II (pre-/post-treatment). Internal consistency reliability was determined by Cronbach's α/McDonalds's ω, sensitivity to change was determined by effect sizes, and MIDs were determined by distribution- (0.5*SD) and anchor-based approaches (mean change method; ROC curve cut-points).
RESULTS: Depression severity reduced over the course of treatment (Median = -65.22%), and 34.48% of patients achieved remission. Reliability was appropriate for post-treatment (range of ω: .70-.90), but questionable for two pre-treatment scales (Noticing: ω = .64; Not-Distracting: ω = .66). The eight dimensions of MAIA-2 were sensitive to change (standardized response mean: .32-.81; Cohen's effect size: .30-.92). Distribution-based MIDs (.38-.61) and anchor-based mean change MIDs (remission vs. partial response: .00-.85; partial response vs. nonresponse: .08-.88) were established on the group level. For six scales, ROC cut-points (remission: .00-1.33; response: -.20-1.00) demonstrated accurate classification to treatment response groups on the individual level.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the applicability of the MAIA-2 questionnaire in MDD. The updated version may have led to reliability improvements regarding the revised scales, but subthreshold reliability was evident prior to treatment. The measure's dimensions were sensitive to change. MIDs were established that corresponded with antidepressive treatment outcomes. Our findings are consistent with a growing area of research which considers somatic feelings as key contributors to mental health.
METHODS: A cross-sectional analytical study was carried out. Self-administered questionnaires were given to 400 patients who registered at an outpatient clinic in April 2018. Convenience sampling was applied.
RESULTS: Monthly income, education level, occupation, and knowledge level are significantly associated with attitude of the respondents toward organ and tissue donation. Occupation influenced attitude toward organ donation. Knowledge of organ donation and brain death both significantly affected attitude toward organ donation.
CONCLUSION: The greater the knowledge of organ donation and brain death, the more positive impression or attitude toward organ donation. Education level and income are the main predictors that influence attitude toward organ donation. Hence, it is important for public health units to promote and deliver public education on organ donation, change public misconceptions, and work parallel with hospitals to increase organ donation rates in Sabah.
METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design and convenient sampling, data were collected in public areas within Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, via face-to-face interview with a structured questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the significant predictors of patients' confidence in ADR reporting.
RESULTS: Out of 860 consented respondents achieving a response rate of 73.5%, only 69 (8%) were aware of the Malaysian ADR monitoring system. The majority (60%) of the respondents indicated they had the confidence to report ADRs. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that ease in completing the ADR reporting form was the strongest variable predictive of confidence to report ADRs (odds ratio [OR], 18.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.55-32.25). Increased confidence in ADR reporting was also associated with education level. Respondents with a higher education level were more likely to be confident to report ADRs compared to those with primary or no formal education (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 0.77-8.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Lack of awareness of the ADR monitoring system is still prevalent among Malaysian patients. The ease of completing the ADR form and education level are predictive of patient confidence to report ADRs. These factors should be considered in designing public promotional activities to encourage patient contributions to pharmacovigilance.
METHODS: A 28-item instrument which comprised of 5 domains: diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, medications and general issues was designed and tested. One point was given for every correct answer, whilst zero was given for incorrect answers. Scores ranged from 0 to 28, which were then converted into percentage. This was administered to 77 patients with type 2 diabetes in a tertiary hospital, who were on medication(s) for diabetes and who could understand English (patient group), and to 40 pharmacists (professional group). The DHL knowledge instrument was administered again to the patient group after one month. Excluded were patients less than 18 years old.
RESULTS: Flesch reading ease was 60, which is satisfactory, while the mean difficulty factor(SD) was 0.74(0.21), indicating that DHL knowledge instrument was moderately easy. Internal consistency of the instrument was good, with Cronbach's α = 0.791. The test-retest scores showed no significant difference for 26 out of the 28 items, indicating that the questionnaire has achieved stable reliability. The overall mean(SD) knowledge scores was significantly different between the patient and professional groups [74.35(14.88) versus 93.84(6.47), p < 0.001]. This means that the DHL knowledge instrument could differentiate the knowledge levels of participants. The DHL knowledge instrument shows similar psychometric properties as other validated questionnaires.
CONCLUSIONS: The DHL knowledge instrument shows good promise to be adopted as an instrument for assessing diabetic patients' knowledge concerning their disease conditions and medications in Malaysia.