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.

Comparative performance of public and private primary care service delivery in Malaysia: An analysis of findings from QUALICOPC.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care services are essential in achieving universal health coverage and Malaysia is looking into public-private partnership to overcome resource constraints. The study aims to compare the performance of primary care service delivery dimensions between public and private sector. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used the data from the Malaysian International Quality and Costs of Primary Care (QUALICOPC) study conducted in 2015-2016. The relative performance of each sector in four dimensions was compared using multi-level linear regression by incorporating a dummy variable indicating public sector in the model. RESULTS: The public sector was shown to have higher performance in comprehensiveness and coordination, while the private sector was better in continuity. There was no significant difference in accessibility. The public primary care services were better in serving primary care sensitive conditions, better informational continuity, and with better skill-mix and inter- and intra- professional relationship. Meanwhile, the private sector was stronger in referral decision making process, specialist feedback and greater out of hours facilities access. CONCLUSIONS: The public and private sectors differ in their strengths, which the government may tap into to strengthen primary care services. Other areas for improvement include seamless care strategies that promote good referral, feedback, and information continuity.

Conjoint analyses of patients' preferences for primary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: While patients' preferences in primary care have been examined in numerous conjoint analyses, there has been little systematic effort to synthesise the findings. This review aimed to identify, to organise and to assess the strength of evidence for the attributes and factors associated with preference heterogeneity in conjoint analyses for primary care outpatient visits. METHODS: We searched five bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Econlit and Scopus) from inception until 15 December 2021, complemented by hand-searching. We included conjoint analyses for primary care outpatient visits. Two reviewers independently screened papers for inclusion and assessed the quality of all included studies using the checklist by ISPOR Task Force for Conjoint Analysis. We categorized the attributes of primary care based on Primary Care Monitoring System framework and factors based on Andersen's Behavioural Model of Health Services Use. We then assessed the strength of evidence and direction of preference for the attributes of primary care, and factors affecting preference heterogeneity based on study quality and consistency in findings. RESULTS: Of 35 included studies, most (82.4%) were performed in high-income countries. Each study examined 3-8 attributes, mainly identified through literature reviews (n = 25). Only six examined visits for chronic conditions, with the rest on acute or non-specific / other conditions. Process attributes were more commonly examined than structure or outcome attributes. The three most commonly examined attributes were waiting time for appointment, out-of-pocket costs and ability to choose the providers they see. We identified 24/58 attributes with strong or moderate evidence of association with primary care uptake (e.g., various waiting times, out-of-pocket costs) and 4/43 factors with strong evidence of affecting preference heterogeneity (e.g., age, gender). CONCLUSIONS: We found 35 conjoint analyses examining 58 attributes of primary care and 43 factors that potentially affect the preference of these attributes. The attributes and factors, stratified into evidence levels based on study quality and consistency, can guide the design of research or policies to improve patients' uptake of primary care. We recommend future conjoint analyses to specify the types of visits and to define their attributes clearly, to facilitate consistent understanding among respondents and the design of interventions targeting them. Word Count: 346/350 words. TRIAL REGISTRATION: On Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/m7ts9.

A Case-Based Monitoring Approach to Evaluate Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines in a Partially Integrated Health Information System: A Study Protocol.

In response to Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic, various COVID-19 vaccines were rapidly administered under emergency use authorization. Rare outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccines might be less likely to be captured in clinical trials, leading to a knowledge gap in real-world vaccine safety. In contrast with high-income countries, many low-to-middle income countries have limited capacity to conduct active surveillance, owing to the absence of large and fully-integrated health information databases. This paper describes the study protocol, which aims to investigate risk of prespecified adverse events of special interests following COVID-19 vaccination in a partially integrated health information system with non-shareable electronic health records. The SAFECOVAC study is a longitudinal, observational retrospective study of active safety surveillance using case-based monitoring approach. This involves linkage of several administrative databases and hospitalization data monitoring to identify adverse events of special interests following administration of COVID-19 vaccines in Malaysia. The source population comprises of all individuals who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Self-controlled design and vaccinated case-coverage design will be employed to assess risk of adverse events of special interests and determine the association with vaccine exposure. Data on vaccination records will be obtained from the national COVID-19 vaccination register to identify the vaccination platforms, doses and the timing of vaccinations. The outcome of this study is hospitalization for the adverse events of special interests between March 2021 and June 2022. The outcomes will be obtained through linkage with hospital admission database and national pharmacovigilance database. Findings will provide analysis of real-world data which can inform deliberations by government and public health decision makers relative to the refinement of COVID-19 vaccination recommendations.

Evaluation of BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness in Malaysia: test negative case-control study.

There is a notable lack of vaccine effectiveness studies using test-negative case-controlled approach in low- and middle-income countries which have different logistic, demographic and socio-economic conditions from high-income countries. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness of BNT162b2 vaccine against COVID-19 infection over time, intensive care unit admission, severe or critical disease and death due to COVID-19. This study was conducted in the resident population of Labuan aged ≥18 years who had been tested for SARS-CoV-2 by Reverse-Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction between 1 March 2021 and 31 October 2021. We used a test-negative case-control design where 2644 pairs of cases and controls were matched by age, sex, testing date, nationality and testing reason. Analysis was stratified by age group to estimate age effect (<60 years and ≥60 years). Of 22217 individuals tested by Reverse-Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction, 5100 were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and aged 18 years and above. Overall vaccine effectiveness ≥ 14 days after the second dose was 65.2% (95% CI: 59.8-69.9%) against COVID-19 infection, 92.5% (95% CI: 72.3-98.8%) against intensive care unit admission, and 96.5% (95% CI: 82.3-99.8%) against COVID-19 deaths. Among infected individuals, vaccine effectiveness was 79.2% (95% CI: 42.3-94.1%) in preventing severe or critical disease due to COVID-19. Vaccine effectiveness for ≥60 years was 72.3% (95% CI: 53.4-83.9%) in fully vaccinated individuals, higher than 64.8% (95% CI: 49.3-59.1%) for those <60 years. Two doses of BNT162b2 were highly effective against COVID-19 infection, severe or critical disease, intensive care unit admission and death due to COVID-19. This study addresses a gap in literature on BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness in low- and middle-income populations and demonstrates the feasibility of such a study design in a resource limited setting while supporting evidence of waning immunity.

Trends for Readmission and Mortality After Heart Failure Hospitalisation in Malaysia, 2007 to 2016.

Background and objectives: Data on population-level outcomes after heart failure (HF) hospitalisation in Asia is sparse. This study aimed to estimate readmission and mortality after hospitalisation among HF patients and examine temporal variation by sex and ethnicity. Methods: Data for 105,399 patients who had incident HF hospitalisations from 2007 to 2016 were identified from a national discharge database and linked to death registration records. The outcomes assessed here were 30-day readmission, in-hospital, 30-day and one-year all-cause mortality. Results: Eighteen percent of patients (n = 16786) were readmitted within 30 days. Mortality rates were 5.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.1-5.4%), 11.2% (11.0-11.4%) and 33.1% (32.9-33.4%) for in-hospital, 30-day and 1-year mortality after the index admission. Age, sex and ethnicity-adjusted 30-day readmissions increased by 2% per calendar year while in-hospital and 30-day mortality declined by 7% and 4% per year respectively. One-year mortality rates remained constant during the study period. Men were at higher risk of 30-day readmission (adjusted rate ratio (RR) 1.16, 1.13-1.20) and one-year mortality (RR 1.17, 1.15-1.19) than women. Ethnic differences in outcomes were evident. Readmission rates were equally high in Chinese and Indians relative to Malays whereas Others, which mainly comprised Indigenous groups, fared worst for in-hospital and 30-day mortality with RR 1.84 (1.64-2.07) and 1.3 (1.21-1.41) relative to Malays. Conclusions: Short-term survival was improving across sex and ethnic groups but prognosis at one year after incident HF hospitalisation remained poor. The steady increase in 30-day readmission rates deserves further investigation.

Efficacy of Early Treatment With Favipiravir on Disease Progression Among High-Risk Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Randomized, Open-Label Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of favipiravir in preventing disease progression in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains uncertain. We aimed to determine its effect in preventing disease progression from nonhypoxia to hypoxia among high-risk COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This was an open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted at 14 public hospitals across Malaysia (February-July 2021) among 500 symptomatic, RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 patients, aged ≥50 years with ≥1 comorbidity, and hospitalized within first 7 days of illness. Patients were randomized 1:1 to favipiravir plus standard care or standard care alone. Favipiravir was administered at 1800 mg 2×/day on day 1 followed by 800 mg 2×/day until day 5. The primary endpoint was rate of clinical progression from nonhypoxia to hypoxia. Secondary outcomes included rates of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 500 patients randomized (mean [SD] age, 62.5 [8.0] years; 258 women [51.6%]; 251 [50.2%] had COVID-19 pneumonia), 487 (97.4%) patients completed the trial. Clinical progression to hypoxia occurred in 46 (18.4%) patients on favipiravir plus standard care and 37 (14.8%) on standard care alone (OR, 1.30; 95% CI: .81-2.09; P = .28). All 3 prespecified secondary endpoints were similar between both groups. Mechanical ventilation occurred in 6 (2.4%) vs 5 (2.0%) (OR, 1.20; 95% CI: .36-4.23; P = .76), ICU admission in 13 (5.2%) vs 12 (4.8%) (OR, 1.09; 95% CI: .48-2.47; P = .84), and in-hospital mortality in 5 (2.0%) vs 0 (OR, 12.54; 95% CI: .76-207.84; P = .08) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among COVID-19 patients at high risk of disease progression, early treatment with oral favipiravir did not prevent their disease progression from nonhypoxia to hypoxia. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04818320).

PICK-ing Malaysia's Epidemic Apart: Effectiveness of a Diverse COVID-19 Vaccine Portfolio.

Malaysia rolled out a diverse portfolio of predominantly three COVID-19 vaccines (AZD1222, BNT162b2, and CoronaVac) beginning 24 February 2021. We evaluated vaccine effectiveness with two methods, covering 1 April to 15 September 2021: (1) the screening method for COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and symptomatic COVID-19; and (2) a retrospective cohort of confirmed COVID-19 cases for COVID-19 related ICU admission and death using logistic regression. The screening method estimated partial vaccination to be 48.8% effective (95% CI: 46.8, 50.7) against COVID-19 infection and 33.5% effective (95% CI: 31.6, 35.5) against symptomatic COVID-19. Full vaccination is estimated at 87.8% effective (95% CI: 85.8, 89.7) against COVID-19 infection and 85.4% effective (95% CI: 83.4, 87.3) against symptomatic COVID-19. Among the cohort of confirmed COVID-19 cases, partial vaccination with any of the three vaccines is estimated at 31.3% effective (95% CI: 28.5, 34.1) in preventing ICU admission, and 45.1% effective (95% CI: 42.6, 47.5) in preventing death. Full vaccination with any of the three vaccines is estimated at 79.1% effective (95% CI: 77.7, 80.4) in preventing ICU admission and 86.7% effective (95% CI: 85.7, 87.6) in preventing deaths. Our findings suggest that full vaccination with any of the three predominant vaccines (AZD1222, BNT162b2, and CoronaVac) in Malaysia has been highly effective in preventing COVID-19 infection, symptomatic COVID-19, COVID-19-related ICU admission, and death.

Comparison between primary care service delivery in Malaysia and other participating countries of the QUALICOPC project: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Most countries including Malaysia have set goals to incorporate a strong primary care into the healthcare system. The aim of this study was to evaluate the strength of service delivery process dimensions in Malaysia and compare it with England, the Netherlands, Spain, North Macedonia, Romania and Turkey which participated in the Quality and Costs of Primary Care (QUALICOPC) study. METHODS: This cross-sectional study utilised the QUALICOPC study data on primary care performance, which was conducted in 2011-2013 (QUALICOPC in Europe Australia, New Zealand and Canada) and 2015-2016 (Malaysia). A standardised questionnaire was completed by primary care practitioners from participating countries. Multilevel regression analysis and composite scores were constructed to compare the performance of primary care on four process dimensions: accessibility, comprehensiveness, continuity of care and coordination. RESULTS: The high-income countries with strong primary care performed better in comprehensiveness, continuity and coordination but poorer in accessibility to services compared with upper-middle-income countries. Among the upper-middle-income countries, Malaysia scored the best in comprehensiveness and coordination. None of the studied countries were having consistent performance over all indicators either in their respective best or worst primary care services delivery dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide variation in primary care services delivery across and within the studied countries. The findings indicate room for quality improvement activities to strengthen primary healthcare services. This includes addressing current healthcare challenges in response to the population health needs which are essential for more integrated and efficient primary care services delivery.

Study protocol on Enhanced Primary Healthcare (EnPHC) interventions: a quasi-experimental controlled study on diabetes and hypertension management in primary healthcare clinics.

AIM: This paper describes the study protocol, which aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted intervention package called 'Enhanced Primary Healthcare' (EnPHC) on the process of care and intermediate clinical outcomes among patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and hypertension. Other outcome measures include patients' experience and healthcare providers' job satisfaction. BACKGROUND: In 2014, almost two-thirds of Malaysia's adult population aged 18 years or older had T2DM, hypertension or hypercholesterolaemia. An analysis of health system performance from 2016 to 2018 revealed that the control and management of diabetes and hypertension in Malaysia was suboptimal with almost half of the patients not diagnosed and just one-quarter of patients with diabetes appropriately treated. EnPHC framework aims to improve diagnosis and effective management of T2DM, hypertension or hypercholesterolaemia and their risk factors by increasing prevention, optimising management and improving surveillance of diagnosed patients. METHODS: This is a quasi-experimental controlled study which involves 20 intervention and 20 control clinics in two different states in Malaysia, namely Johor and Selangor. The clinics in the two states were matched and randomly allocated to 'intervention' and 'control' arms. The EnPHC framework targets different levels from community to primary healthcare clinics and integrated referral networks.Data are collected via a retrospective chart review (RCR), patient exit survey, healthcare provider survey and an intervention checklist. The data collected are entered into tablet computers which have installed in them an offline survey application. Interrupted time series and difference-in-differences (DiD) analyses will be conducted to report outcomes.

Variation of polypharmacy in older primary care attenders occurs at prescriber level.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is particularly important in older persons as they are more likely to experience adverse events compared to the rest of the population. Despite the relevance, there is a lack of studies on the possible association of patient, prescriber and practice characteristics with polypharmacy. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the rate of polypharmacy among older persons attending public and private primary care clinics, and its association with patient, prescriber and practice characteristics. METHODS: We used data from The National Medical Care Survey (NMCS), a national cross-sectional survey of patients' visits to primary care clinics in Malaysia. A weighted total of 22,832 encounters of patients aged ≥65 years were analysed. Polypharmacy was defined as concomitant use of five medications and above. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to examine the association of polypharmacy with patient, prescriber and practice characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 20.3% of the older primary care attenders experienced polypharmacy (26.7%% in public and 11.0% in private practice). The adjusted odds ratio (OR) of polypharmacy were 6.37 times greater in public practices. Polypharmacy was associated with patients of female gender (OR 1.49), primary education level (OR 1.61) and multimorbidity (OR 14.21). The variation in rate of polypharmacy was mainly found at prescriber level. CONCLUSION: Polypharmacy is common among older persons visiting primary care practices. Given the possible adverse outcomes, interventions to reduce the burden of polypharmacy are best to be directed at individual prescribers.