Search

Background: Malaysia has committed to the global call to achieve universal health coverage, and with the adoption of Sustainable Development Goals, is further strengthening the health system through the primary health care services, particularly the family doctor concept. The Enhanced Primary Health Care (EnPHC) initiative was implemented to address the worrying upward trend of non-communicable disease prevalence, and incorporates the Family Health Team (FHT) concept. The aim of this paper is to describe the implementation of the FHT as part of the EnPHC intervention. Methods: In-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with the intervention design team, healthcare providers and patients in two rounds during the implementation period. A total of 121 individuals in the two rounds, split into different groups, where some of the participants of the FGD were also interviewed individually. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis, with codes being organised into larger themes. Results: Themes that emerged from the data were around the process of FHT implementation and the advantages of the FHT, which included continuity of health care and improved quality of care. Patients and health care providers were receptive to the FHT concept, and took the effort to adapt the concept in the local settings. Conclusions: The FHT concept implemented at 20 public primary health clinics has benefits appreciated by health care providers and patients. Addressing the viable shortcomings would better prepare the current primary healthcare system to scale up the FHT concept nationwide and enhance its feasibility and sustainability. Trial registration: The study is registered with the National Medical Research Register, Ministry of Health Malaysia (NMRR-17-295-34711). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Variation at different levels of diabetes care has not yet been quantified for low- and middle-income countries. Understanding this variation and its magnitude is important to guide policy makers in designing effective interventions. This study aims to quantify the variation in the control of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients at the clinic and patient level and determine patient and clinic factors associated with control of these outcomes in T2D. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study within the baseline data from the impact evaluation of the Enhanced Primary Health Care (EnPHC) intervention on 40 public clinics in Malaysia. Patients aged 30 and above, diagnosed with T2D, had a clinic visit for T2D between 01 Nov 2016 and 30 April 2017 and had at least one HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C measurement within 1 year from the date of visit were included for analysis. Multilevel linear regression adjusting for patient and clinic characteristics was used to quantify variation at the clinic and patient levels for each outcome. Results: Variation in intermediate clinical outcomes in T2D lies predominantly (93% and above) at the patient level. The strongest predictors for poor disease control in T2D were the proxy measures for disease severity including duration of diabetes, presence of microvascular complications, being on insulin therapy and number of antihypertensives. Among the three outcomes, HbA1c and LDL-C results provide greatest opportunity for improvement. Conclusion: Clinic variation in HbA1c, SBP and LDL-C accounts for a small percentage from total variation. Findings from this study suggest that standardised interventions need to be applied across all clinics, with a focus on customizing therapy based on individual patient characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Implementation of the new Enhanced Primary Health Care (EnPHC) intervention aims to improve service quality and experience at primary healthcare clinics; especially to newly diagnosed patients. This was achieved by restructuring and improving existing services to better manage non-communicable diseases amongst patients. Objectives of this study are to explore patients' experiences of the EnPHC intervention, to document their feedback and to determine effects of EnPHC intervention on patients. Methods: This phenomenological qualitative study focussed on patients' experiences in relation to EnPHC interventions. Participants were purposely selected from a group of patients who attended the eight intervention primary healthcare clinics in Johor and Selangor regularly for treatment. Data collection was conducted between April to July 2018. Semi-structured interviews were conducted at average an hour per interview for four to five patients per clinic. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Results: A total of 35 patients participated. Analysis revealed five main themes about patient experiences receiving the EnPHC intervention. These are: (1) health assessment in disease progress monitoring, (2) patient-doctor relationship and continuity of care, (3) professionalism in service delivery, (4) ensuring compliance in achieving health targets and (5) communication skills. Each theme represents an important aspect of the service, how it should be delivered within the patient expectations and how it can improve patient's health through their lens. Conclusion: Even though patients were not able to exactly identify the EnPHC intervention components implemented, they are able to describe the process changes that occurred; enabling them to improve their healthcare status. Engagement is necessary to better inform patients of the EnPHC intervention, its purpose, mechanisms, changes and importance for healthcare. It would reduce resistance and increase awareness amongst patients at the clinic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Majority of patients with chronic illnesses such as diabetes, receive care at primary care setting. Efforts have been made to restructure diabetes care in the Malaysian primary care setting in accordance with the Chronic Care Model (CCM). The Patient Assessment on Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) is a validated self-report tool to measure the extent to which patients with chronic illness receive care that aligns with the CCM. To date, no validated tool is available to evaluate healthcare delivery based on the CCM in the Malay language. Thus, the study aimed to translate the PACIC into the Malay language and validate the questionnaire among patients with diabetes in the Malaysian public primary care setting. Methods: The English version of the PACIC questionnaire is a 20-item scale measuring five key components, which are patient activation, decision support, goal setting, problem solving and follow-up care. The PACIC underwent forward - backward translation and cross cultural adaptation process to produce the PACIC-Malay version (PACIC-M). Reliability was tested using internal consistencies and test-retest reliability analyses, while construct validity was tested using the exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Results: The content of PACIC-M and the original version were conceptually equivalent. Overall, the internal consistency by Cronbach's α was.94 and the intra-class correlation coefficient was.93. One item was deleted (item 1) when the factor loading was < 0.4. The factor analyses using promax identified three components ('Goal Setting/Tailoring and Problem solving/Contextual', 'follow-up/coordination' and 'patient activation and delivery system design/ decision support'); explaining 61.2% of the variation. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) was 0.93 and Bartlett's test of sphericity was p =.000. Therefore, the final version of the PACIC-M consisted of 19 items, framed within three components. Conclusion: The findings demonstrated that the PACIC-M measured different dimensions from the English version of PACIC. It is however; highly reliable and valid to be used in assessing three CCM model subscales. Further confirmatory factor analysis of PACIC-M should be conducted to confirm this new model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To evaluate the effectiveness of a structured prescription review and prescriber feedback program in reducing prescribing errors in government primary care clinics within an administrative region in Malaysia. Methods: This was a three group, pragmatic, cluster randomised trial. In phase 1, we randomised 51 clinics to a full intervention group (prescription review and league tables plus authorised feedback letter), a partial intervention group (prescription review and league tables), and a control group (prescription review only). Prescribers in these clinics were the target of our intervention. Prescription reviews were performed by pharmacists; 20 handwritten prescriptions per prescriber were consecutively screened on a random day each month, and errors identified were recorded in a standardised data collection form. Prescribing performance feedback was conducted at the completion of each prescription review cycle. League tables benchmark prescribing errors across clinics and individual prescribers, while the authorised feedback letter detailed prescribing performance based on a rating scale. In phase 2, all clinics received the full intervention. Pharmacists were trained on data collection, and all data were audited by researchers as an implementation fidelity strategy. The primary outcome, percentage of prescriptions with at least one error, was displayed in p-charts to enable group comparison. Results: A total of 32,200 prescriptions were reviewed. In the full intervention group, error reduction occurred gradually and was sustained throughout the 8-month study period. The process mean error rate of 40.7% (95% CI 27.4, 29.5%) in phase 1 reduced to 28.4% (95% CI 27.4, 29.5%) in phase 2. In the partial intervention group, error reduction was not well sustained and showed a seasonal pattern with larger process variability. The phase 1 error rate averaging 57.9% (95% CI 56.5, 59.3%) reduced to 44.8% (95% CI 43.3, 46.4%) in phase 2. There was no evidence of improvement in the control group, with phase 1 and phase 2 error rates averaging 41.1% (95% CI 39.6, 42.6%) and 39.3% (95% CI 37.8, 40.9%) respectively. Conclusions: The rate of prescribing errors in primary care settings is high, and routine prescriber feedback comprising league tables and a feedback letter can effectively reduce prescribing errors. Trial registration: National Medical Research Register: NMRR-12-108-11,289 (5th March 2012). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]