MATERIALS AND METHODS: The evaluation was conducted among key informants in the National Cancer Registry (NCR) and reporting facilities from FebMay 2012 and was based on US CDC guidelines. Representativeness was assessed by matching cancer case in the Health Information System (HIS) and state pathology records with those in NCR. Data quality was measured through case finding and reabstracting of medical records by independent auditors. The reabstracting portion comprised 15 data items. Selfadministered questionnaires were used to assess simplicity and acceptability. Timeliness was measured from date of diagnosis to date of notification received and data dissemination.
RESULTS: Of 4613 cancer cases reported in HIS, 83.3% were matched with cancer registry. In the state pathology centre, 99.8% was notified to registry. Duplication of notification was 3%. Data completeness calculated for 104 samples was 63.4%. Registrars perceived simplicity in coding diagnosis as moderate. Notification process was moderately acceptable. Median duration of interval 1 was 5.7 months.
CONCLUSIONS: The performances of registry's attributes are fairly positive in terms of simplicity, case reporting sensitivity, and predictive value positive. It is moderately acceptable, data completeness and inflexible. The usefulness of registry is the area of concern to achieve registry objectives. Timeliness of reporting is within international standard, whereas timeliness to data dissemination was longer up to 4 years. Integration between existing HIS and national registration department will improve data quality.
METHODS: The video was developed using the BC delay explanatory model. A self-administered pre- and post-survey on 241 newly diagnosed BC patients in University Malaya Medical Center was performed. The Wilcoxon matched paired signed rank test was used to evaluate patients' pre and post perceived knowledge using a Likert scale 0 to 4 (0 = "no knowledge," 4 = "a great degree of knowledge"). Treatment adherence among participants were measured after 1-year follow-up.
RESULTS: Eighty percent of the patients reported that the video met or exceeded their expectations. In total 80.5% reported that the video was very effective and effective in improving their perspective on BC treatments. There was improvement in perceived knowledge for treatment options (mean scores; M = 0.93 versus M = 2.97) (p < 0.001) and also for perceived knowledge on types of operation, information on chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy, healthy diet, physical activity after treatments, and care of the arm after operation(p < 0.001). In total 89.4%, 79.3%, and 85.9% adhered to surgical, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy recommended treatment, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The video improved patients' perceived knowledge and satisfaction. The program improved access not only to new BC patients but also the public and found sustainable using the YouTube platform.
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.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING: Primary care setting.
PARTICIPANTS: Of 1568 studies screened, 14 studies with 7035 PWID were included.
MEASURES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciences, CENTRAL and Cochrane review databases were searched without language restriction from their inception to 27 January 2016. All published study designs with control groups that reported the effectiveness of pharmacy-based NSP on outcomes of interest were included. Outcomes of interest are risk behaviour (RB), HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) prevalence and economic outcomes. The estimates of pooled effects of these outcomes were calculated as pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 and χ2 tests.
FINDINGS: Most studies (nine of 14, 64.3%) were rated as having a serious risk of bias, while 28.6 and 7.1% were rated as having a moderate risk and low risk of bias, respectively. For sharing-syringe behaviour, pharmacy-based NSPs were significantly better than no NSPs for both main (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.34-0.73; I2 = 59.6%) and sensitivity analyses, excluding studies with a serious risk of bias (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.32-0.84; I2 = 41.4%). For safe syringe disposal and HIV/HCV prevalence, the evidence for pharmacy-based NSPs compared with other NSP or no NSP was unclear, as few of the studies reported this and most of them had a serious risk of bias. Compared with the total life-time cost of US$55 640 for treating a person with HIV infection, the HIV prevalence among PWID has to be at least 0.8% (for pharmacy-based NSPs) or 2.1% (for other NSPs) to result in cost-savings.
CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-based needle/syringe exchange programmes appear to be effective for reducing risk behaviours among people who inject drugs, although their effect on HIV/HCV prevalence and economic outcomes is unclear.
EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: Community pharmacists attended a one-day workshop, supplemented with comprehensive training materials which enabled participants to conduct similar sessions with their peers at their own time. The workshop, consisting of case study discussion and role plays, was designed to be an engaging and interactive program that combined traditional didactic sessions and experiential, discussion-based learning. A pre- and post-workshop questionnaire were administered immediately before and after the event to all attending participants.
FINDINGS: Core concepts covered in the workshop included: (1) overview of an ageing population, (2) issues with ageing population, (3) medication review, and (4) dietary requirements and dosage forms in older adults. Participants' (n = 39) noted significant improvements in knowledge (mean score change 0.7, p
METHODS: The Question, Persuade, Refer program materials were translated and adapted for implementation in the hospital setting for nonpsychiatric health professionals. There were 159 (mean age = 35.75 years; SD = 12.26) participants in this study. Most participants were female (84.9%), staff/community nurses (52.2%), who worked in the general medical department (30.2%) and had no experience managing suicidal patients (64.2%). Intervention participants (n = 53) completed a survey questionnaire at pretraining, immediately after training, and after three months. Control participants (n = 106) were not exposed to the training program and completed the same questionnaire at baseline and three months later.
RESULTS: Significant improvement occurred among intervention participants in terms of perceived knowledge, self-efficacy, and understanding of/willingness to help suicidal patients immediately after training and when compared with the control participants 3 months later. Improvements in declarative knowledge were not maintained at the 3-month follow-up.
DISCUSSION: This study confirmed the short-term effectiveness of the gatekeeper training program. Gatekeeper suicide training is recommended for implementation for nonpsychiatric health professionals nationwide.