Impact of Diabetes Medication Therapy Adherence Clinic (DMTAC) appointment intervals on glycemic control in public health clinics across Perak, Malaysia.

Introduction: Frequent diabetes medication therapy adherence clinic (DMTAC) appointments may lead to more rapid glycaemic control. This study aimed to evaluate the association between appointment intervals and glycaemic control (haemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] level) along with blood pressure (BP) and lipid profile (LP) during DMTAC appointments. Method: This study retrospectively reviewed all recorded baseline and completed DMTAC data, including HbA1c level, LP and BP, of 318 eligible participants from 29 DMTACs across Perak. The participants were divided into shorter appointment interval (SAI) (≤30 days) and longer appointment interval (LAI) groups. Results: The majority of the baseline socio-demographic and clinical characteristics did not significantly differ between the SAI and LAI groups (p>0.05). Ischaemic heart disease (Odds ratio, OR=3.457; 95% CI= 1.354-8.826; p=0.009) and hypertension (OR=0.521; 95% CI=0.276-0.992; p=0.044) were significantly associated with the appointment intervals. Upon completion of eight DMTAC visits, the HbA1c and FBS levels and DBP significantly improved (p<0.05). However, the mean HbA1c level (1.35±2.18% vs 0.87±2.11%, p=0.548), FBS level (1.25±4.82mmol/L vs 2.29±6.23mmol/L, p=0.538), SBP (3.28±21.82mmHg vs 3.65±18.35mmHg, p=0.343) and LDL level (0.09±0.98mmol/L vs 0.07±1.13mmol/L, p=0.246) did not significantly differ between the SAI and LAI groups. Conclusion: Longer DMTAC appointment intervals had similar improvement in glycaemic controls, blood pressure and lipid profiles as compared to shorter appointment intervals. A longer interval can be scheduled for lower-risk patients to optimise the use of human resources and minimise costs.

Prevalence of limited health literacy and its associated factors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Perak, Malaysia: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Limited health literacy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) led to poorer diabetes knowledge, less medication adherence and increased healthcare cost. The purpose of this paper was to report the prevalence of limited health literacy in patients with T2DM and to identify factors that are associated with it. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January to March 2018; data on patients' sociodemographic characteristics, diabetes knowledge, perceived social support and health literacy level were collected. Health literacy level was measured using the European Health Literacy Survey Questionnaire (HLS-EU-Q47). SETTING: Patients were recruited from four primary care clinics in Perak, Malaysia. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients diagnosed with T2DM who attended the study clinics during the study period. PRIMARY OUTCOME VARIABLE: Patients with HLS-EU-Q47 General Index of ≤33 points were classified as having limited health literacy. RESULTS: The prevalence of limited health literacy was 65.3% (n=279). In bivariate analysis, patients' ethnicity (p=0.04), highest education level (p<0.001), monthly income (p=0.003), having health insurance (p=0.007), English language fluency (p<0.001), Malay language fluency (p=0.021), attending diabetes education sessions (p<0.001), perceived social support (p<0.001) and diabetes knowledge (p=0.019) were factors associated with limited health literacy. In logistic regression, not being fluent in English was associated with limited health literacy (OR=2.36, 95% CI 1.30 to 4.30) whereas having high perceived social support (OR=0.52, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.69) and having attended diabetes education sessions (OR=0.42, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.68) were associated with adequate health literacy. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of limited health literacy is high among patients with T2DM in Perak, Malaysia. Strategies to improve health literacy in these patients must consider the influences of English fluency, attendance at diabetes education sessions and social support, and may need to adopt a universal approach to addressing limited health literacy.

Health literacy experiences of multi-ethnic patients and their health-care providers in the management of type 2 diabetes in Malaysia: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) require adequate health literacy to understand the disease and learn self-management skills to optimize their health. However, the prevalence of limited health literacy is high in patients with T2DM, especially in Asian countries. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore experiences related to health literacy in Asian patients with T2DM. DESIGN: This is a qualitative study using in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. A framework analysis was used to analyse the data. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: articipants (n = 24) were multi-ethnic patients with T2DM (n = 18) and their primary health-care providers (n = 6). This study was conducted in four primary health-care clinics in Malaysia. RESULTS: Nine subthemes were identified within the four dimensions of health literacy: accessing, understanding, appraising and applying information. DISCUSSION: Motivated patients actively sought information, while others passively received information shared by family members, friends or even strangers. Language and communication skills played important roles in helping patients understand this information. Information appraisal was lacking, with patients just proceeding to apply the information obtained. Patients' use of information was influenced by their self-efficacy, and internal and external barriers. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the experiences of multi-ethnic patients with T2DM regarding health literacy were varied and heavily influenced by their cultures.

Barriers to implementing a national health screening program for men in Malaysia: An online survey of healthcare providers.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to determine the views and practices of healthcare providers and barriers they encountered when implementing the national health screening program for men in a public primary care setting in Malaysia. METHODS: An online survey was conducted among healthcare providers across public health clinics in Malaysia. All family medicine specialists, medical officers, nurses and assistant medical officers involved in the screening program for adult men were invited to answer a 51-item questionnaire via email or WhatsApp. The questionnaire comprised five sections: participants' socio-demographic information, current screening practices, barriers and facilitators to using the screening tool, and views on the content and format of the screening tool. RESULTS: A total of 231 healthcare providers from 129 health clinics participated in this survey. Among them, 37.44% perceived the implementation of the screening program as a "top-down decision." Although 37.44% found the screening tool for adult men "useful," some felt that it was "time consuming" to fill out (38.2%) and "lengthy" (28.3%). In addition, 'adult men refuse to answer' (24.1%) was cited as the most common patient-related barrier. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided useful insights into the challenges encountered by the public healthcare providers when implementing a national screening program for men. The screening tool for adult men should be revised to make it more user-friendly. Further studies should explore the reasons why men were reluctant to participate in health screenings, thus enhancing the implementation of screening programs in primary care.

Barriers to implementing a national health screening program for men in Malaysia: An online survey of healthcare providers

@#Introduction: This study aimed to determine the views and practices of healthcare providers and barriers they encountered when implementing the national health screening program for men in a public primary care setting in Malaysia. Methods: An online survey was conducted among healthcare providers across public health clinics in Malaysia. All family medicine specialists, medical officers, nurses and assistant medical officers involved in the screening program for adult men were invited to answer a 51-item questionnaire via email or WhatsApp. The questionnaire comprised five sections: participants’ socio-demographic information, current screening practices, barriers and facilitators to using the screening tool, and views on the content and format of the screening tool. Results: A total of 231 healthcare providers from 129 health clinics participated in this survey. Among them, 37.44% perceived the implementation of the screening program as a “top-down decision.” Although 37.44% found the screening tool for adult men “useful,” some felt that it was “time consuming” to fill out (38.2%) and “lengthy” (28.3%). In addition, ‘adult men refuse to answer’ (24.1%) was cited as the most common patient-related barrier. Conclusions: This study provided useful insights into the challenges encountered by the public healthcare providers when implementing a national screening program for men. The screening tool for adult men should be revised to make it more user-friendly. Further studies should explore the reasons why men were reluctant to participate in health screenings, thus enhancing the implementation of screening programs in primary care.