Knowledge of acute stroke management and the predictors among Malaysian healthcare professionals.

Background: Despite rapid advances in acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) management, many healthcare professionals (HCPs) might not be aware of the latest recommended management of AIS patients. Therefore, we aimed to determine the level and factors associated with AIS management knowledge among Malaysian HCPs. Methods: This cross-sectional online questionnaire study was conducted nationwide among 627 HCPs in Malaysia using the Acute Stroke Management Questionnaire (ASMaQ). Multiple logistic regression was used to predict the relationship between the independent variables (age, gender, years of service, profession, work setting, work sector, seeing stroke patients in daily practice, and working with specialists) and the outcome variable (good vs poor knowledge). Results: Approximately 76% (95% CI [73-79%]) of HCPs had good overall knowledge of stroke. The highest proportion of HCPs with good knowledge was noted for General Stroke Knowledge (GSK) [88.5% (95% CI [86-91%])], followed by Advanced Stroke Management (ASM) [61.2% (95% CI [57-65%])] and Hyperacute Stroke Management (HSM) [58.1% (95% CI [54-62%])]. The odds of having poor knowledge of stroke were significantly higher among non-doctor HCPs [adjusted OR = 3.46 (95% CI [1.49-8.03]), P = 0.004]; among those not seeing stroke patients in daily practice [adjusted OR = 2.67 (95% CI [1.73-4.10]), P < 0.001]; and among those working without specialists [adjusted OR = 2.41 (95% CI [1.38-4.18]), P = 0.002]. Conclusions: Stroke education should be prioritised for HCPs with limited experience and guidance. All HCPs need to be up-to-date on the latest AIS management and be able to make a prompt referral to an appropriate facility. Therefore, more stroke patients will benefit from advanced stroke care.

Blood and urine biomarkers in chronic kidney disease: An update.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a silent disease. Most CKD patients are unaware of their condition during the early stages of the disease which poses a challenge for healthcare professionals to institute treatment or start prevention. The trouble with the diagnosis of CKD is that in most parts of the world, it is still diagnosed based on measurements of serum creatinine and corresponding calculations of eGFR. There are controversies with the current staging system, especially in the methodology to diagnose and prognosticate CKD. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to examine studies that focused on the different types of samples which may serve as a good and promising biomarker for early diagnosis of CKD or to detect rapidly declining renal function among CKD patient. METHOD: The review of international literature was made on paper and electronic databases Nature, PubMed, Springer Link and Science Direct. The Scopus index was used to verify the scientific relevance of the papers. Publications were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULT: 63 publications were found to be compatible with the study objectives. Several biomarkers of interest with different sample types were taken for comparison. CONCLUSION: Biomarkers from urine samples yield more significant outcome as compare to biomarkers from blood samples. But, validation and confirmation with a different type of study designed on a larger population is needed. More comparison studies on different types of samples are needed to further illuminate which biomarker is the better tool for the diagnosis and prognosis of CKD.