The effects of enhanced primary healthcare interventions on primary care providers' job satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: In response to the rising burden of cardiovascular risk factors, the Malaysian government has implemented Enhanced Primary Healthcare (EnPHC) interventions in July 2017 at public clinic level to improve management and clinical outcomes of type 2 diabetes and hypertensive patients. Healthcare providers (HCPs) play crucial roles in healthcare service delivery and health system reform can influence HCPs' job satisfaction. However, studies evaluating HCPs' job satisfaction following primary care transformation remain scarce in low- and middle-income countries. This study aims to evaluate the effects of EnPHC interventions on HCPs' job satisfaction. METHODS: This is a quasi-experimental study conducted in 20 intervention and 20 matched control clinics. We surveyed all HCPs who were directly involved in patient management. A self-administered questionnaire which included six questions on job satisfaction were assessed on a scale of 1-4 at baseline (April and May 2017) and post-intervention phase (March and April 2019). Unadjusted intervention effect was calculated based on absolute differences in mean scores between intervention and control groups after implementation. Difference-in-differences analysis was used in the multivariable linear regression model and adjusted for providers and clinics characteristics to detect changes in job satisfaction following EnPHC interventions. A negative estimate indicates relative decrease in job satisfaction in the intervention group compared with control group. RESULTS: A total of 1042 and 1215 HCPs responded at baseline and post-intervention respectively. At post-intervention, the intervention group reported higher level of stress with adjusted differences of - 0.139 (95% CI -0.266,-0.012; p = 0.032). Nurses, being the largest workforce in public clinics were the only group experiencing dissatisfaction at post-intervention. In subgroup analysis, nurses from intervention group experienced increase in work stress following EnPHC interventions with adjusted differences of - 0.223 (95% CI -0.419,-0.026; p = 0.026). Additionally, the same group were less likely to perceive their profession as well-respected at post-intervention (ß = - 0.175; 95% CI -0.331,-0.019; p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that EnPHC interventions had resulted in some untoward effect on HCPs' job satisfaction. Job dissatisfaction can have detrimental effects on the organisation and healthcare system. Therefore, provider experience and well-being should be considered before introducing healthcare delivery reforms to avoid overburdening of HCPs.

The Effectiveness of Enhanced Primary Healthcare (EnPHC) interventions on Type 2 diabetes management in Malaysia: Difference-in-differences (DID) analysis.

AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Enhanced Primary Healthcare (EnPHC) interventions on process of care and intermediate clinical outcomes among type 2 diabetes patients. METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental controlled study conducted in 20 intervention and 20 control public primary care clinics in Malaysia from November 2016 to June 2019. Type 2 diabetes patients aged 30 years and above were selected via systematic random sampling. Outcomes include process of care and intermediate clinical outcomes. Difference-in-differences analyses was conducted. RESULTS: We reviewed 12,017 medical records of patients with type 2 diabetes. Seven process of care measures improved: HbA1c tests (odds ratio (OR) 3.31, 95% CI 2.13, 5.13); lipid test (OR 4.59, 95% CI 2.64, 7.97), LDL (OR 4.33, 95% CI 2.16, 8.70), and urine albumin (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.12, 3.55) tests; BMI measured (OR 15.80, 95% CI 4.78, 52.24); cardiovascular risk assessment (OR 174.65, 95% CI 16.84, 1810.80); and exercise counselling (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04, 1.33). We found no statistically significant changes in intermediate clinical outcomes (i.e. HbA1c, LDL, HDL and BP control). CONCLUSIONS: EnPHC interventions was successful in enhancing the quality of care, in terms of process of care, by changing healthcare providers behaviour.

Optimal cut-off points for adherence measure among patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care clinics: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medication adherence measures are often dichotomized to classify patients into those with good or poor adherence using a cut-off value ⩾80%, but this cut-off may not be universal across diseases or medication classes. This study aimed to examine the cut-off value that optimally distinguish good and poor adherence by using the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC) as adherence measures and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as outcome measure among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. METHOD: We used pharmacy dispensing data of 1461 eligible T2DM patients from public primary care clinics in Malaysia treated with oral antidiabetic drugs between January 2018 and May 2019. Adherence rates were calculated during the period preceding the HbA1c measurement. Adherence cut-off values for the following conditions were compared: adherence measure (MPR versus PDC), assessment period (90-day versus 180-day), and HbA1c target (⩽7.0% versus ⩽8.0%). RESULTS: The optimal adherence cut-offs for MPR and PDC in predicting HbA1c ⩽7.0% ranged between 86.1% and 98.3% across the two assessment periods. In predicting HbA1c ⩽8.0%, the optimal adherence cut-offs ranged from 86.1% to 92.8%. The cut-off value was notably higher with PDC as the adherence measure, shorter assessment period, and a stricter HbA1c target (⩽7.0%) as outcome. CONCLUSION: We found that optimal adherence cut-off appeared to be slightly higher than the conventional value of 80%. The adherence thresholds may vary depending on the length of assessment period and outcome definition but a reasonably wise cut-off to distinguish good versus poor medication adherence to be clinically meaningful should be at 90%.