Development, validity and reliability of instrument to evaluate implementation fidelity of the Family Doctor Concept (FDC) programme in public primary care clinics in Malaysia.

Introduction: The Family Doctor Concept (FDC) programme was introduced to public primary care clinics in late 2013 as part of the reform agenda in the primary healthcare delivery system. The study aimed to develop a validated and reliable instrument to evaluate the FDC implementation fidelity in primary care clinics. Methods: The instrument, which adapted the concept of patient-centred care (PCC), resulted from a series of expert discussions, a literature search, an FDC guideline, and a review of meeting minutes. A 2-step process was conducted with experts to achieve content and face validity. Consequently, the instrument was piloted in 5 public primary care clinics in Selangor involving 8 trained raters. Inter-rater reliability was estimated using intraclass correlation (ICC), while internal consistency was measured using Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20). Results: The final instrument comprises 3 sections (instructions, clinic's characteristics and assessment items), with Section 3 containing 15 items divided into four components - population registration, formation of a primary care team, integrated treatment, and monitoring and evaluation. The ICC for total score was excellent, 0.981, while the ICCs of the individual component scores were good to excellent (population registration: 0.937, formation of primary care team: 0.742, integrated treatment: 0.996, and monitoring and evaluation: 0.996). The value of KR-20 was 0.615, which was considered adequate. Conclusion: The instrument developed was found to be valid in terms of face and content validity and reliable in measuring the fidelity of FDC implementation with excellent inter-rater reliability.

Protocol for a cross-sectional study measuring person-centredness among healthcare providers in Malaysian primary care clinics: the adaptation and validation of the Person-Centred Practice Inventory-Staff (PCPI-S) Questionnaire.

INTRODUCTION: Person-centred care (PCC) has become a global movement in healthcare. Despite this, the level of PCC is not routinely assessed in clinical practice. This protocol describes the adaptation and validation of the Person-Centred Practice Inventory-Staff (PCPI-S) tool that will be used to assess person-centred practices of primary healthcare providers in Malaysia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To ensure conceptual and item equivalence, the original version of the PCPI-S will be reviewed and adapted for cultural context by an expert committee. The instrument will subsequently be translated into Malay language using the forward-backward translation method by two independent bilingual speaking individuals. This will be pretested in four primary care clinics and refined accordingly. The instrument will be assessed for its psychometric properties, such as test-retest reliability, construct and internal validity, using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study findings will be disseminated to healthcare professionals and academicians in the field through publication in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations, as well as at managerial clinic sites for practice improvement. The study was approved by the Medical Research and Ethics Committee (MREC), Ministry of Health Malaysia (KKM/NIHSEC/ P18-766 (14) and Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (2018-14363-19627).

A nationwide survey of public healthcare providers' impressions of family medicine specialists in Malaysia: a qualitative analysis of written comments.

OBJECTIVE: To examine impressions of public healthcare providers/professionals (PHCPs) who are working closely with family medicine specialists (FMSs) at public health clinics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: This study is part of a larger national study on the perception of Malaysian public healthcare professionals on FMSs (PERMFAMS). PARTICIPANTS: PHCPs from three categories of health facility: hospitals, health clinics and health offices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Qualitative analyses of written comments of respondents' general impression of FMSs. RESULTS: The participants' response rate was 58.0% (780/1345), with almost equal proportions from each public healthcare facility. A total of 23 categories for each of the 648 impression comments were identified. The six emerging themes were: (1) importance of FMSs; (2) roles of FMSs; (3) clinical performance of FMSs; (4) attributes of FMSs; (5) FMS practice challenges; (6) misconception of FMS roles. Overall, FMS practice was perceived to be safe and able to provide effective treatments in a challenging medical discipline that was in line with the current standards of medical care and ethical and professional values. The areas of concern were in clinical performance expressed by PHCPs from some hospitals and the lack of personal attributes and professionalism among FMSs mentioned by PHCPs from health clinics and offices. CONCLUSIONS: FMSs were perceived to be capable of providing effective treatment and were considered to be important primary care physicians. There were a few negative impressions in some areas of FMS practice, which demanded attention by the FMSs themselves and the relevant authorities in order to improve efficiency and safeguard the fraternity's reputation.

A nationwide postal survey on the perception of Malaysian public healthcare providers on family medicine specialists' (PERMFAMS) clinical performance, professional attitudes and research visibility.

Perception of healthcare providers who worked with family medicine specialists (FMSs) could translate into the effectiveness of primary healthcare delivery in daily practices. This study examined perceptions of public healthcare providers/professionals (PHCPs) on FMSs at public health clinics throughout Malaysia. This was a cross-sectional study in 2012-2013 using postal method targeting PHCPs from three categories of health facilities, namely health clinics, health offices and hospitals. A structured questionnaire was developed to assess PHCP's perception of FMS's clinical competency, safety practice, ethical and professional values, and research involvement. It consists of 37 items with Likert scale of strongly disagree (a score of 1) to strongly agree (a score of 5). Interaction and independent effect of the independent variables were tested and adjusted means score were reported. The participants' response rate was 58.0% (780/1345) with almost equal proportion from each of the three public healthcare facilities. There were more positive perceptions than negative among the PHCPs. FMSs were perceived to provide effective and safe treatment to their patients equally disregards of patient's social background. However, there were some concerns of FMSs not doing home visits, not seeing walk-in patients, had long appointment time, not active in scientific research, writing and publication. There were significant differences in perception based on a respondent's health care facility (p < 0.0001) and frequency of encounter (p < 0.0001). PHCPs had overall positive perceptions on FMSs across all the domains investigated. PHCPs from different health care facilities and frequency of encounter with FMSs had different perception. Practicing FMSs could improve on the critical service areas that were perceived to be important but lacking. FMSs might need further support in conducting research and writing for publication.