Introduction: The ‘5A’ model for smoking cessation was introduced in 2000 by the US Department of Health and Services. This brief intervention was recommended worldwide for smoking cessation. However, little is known about its effectiveness for smoking cessation in a primary care setting in Malaysia. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of a brief intervention for smoking cessation using the ‘5A’ model with self-help materials compared to using self-help materials alone. Methods: This randomised controlled trial was conducted at the Primary Care Clinic at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) between June and October 2009. Subjects were all current smokers aged 18 years and above. A total of 208 subjects were recruited and randomised into two groups. Subjects in the intervention group were given a brief intervention based on the ‘5A’ model with selfhelp materials, while the control group received self-help materials alone. Subjects were later followed up at one and four months via telephone calls. The outcome measure was a self-reported attempt to quit smoking. Results: At one-month follow-up, 15/77 (19.5%) of the participants in the intervention group had attempted to quit smoking compared to 8/80 (10.0%) in the control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.09). At the four-month follow-up, 13/58 (22.4%) participants in the intervention group had attempted to quit smoking compared to 9/57 (15.8%) in the control group. Once more, there was no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.37). Conclusion: This study showed that there was no significant difference between a brief intervention using the ‘5A’ model with self-help materials and using self-help materials alone for smoking cessation in a Malaysian primary care setting. However, these results do need to be treated with caution when taking into consideration the high dropout rate and bias in the study design.

Introduction: In Malaysia, Diabetes Medication Therapy Adherence Clinic (DMTAC) in hospital settings significantly improved patients' glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk. Until now no randomised controlled trial of DMTAC has been done in a primary care setting where the access to subspecialist services (endocrinologists, expensive medication, etc.) is limited. The objective of this research is to compare the glycaemic control among diabetes mellitus (DM) patients between those received additional DMTAC service and those received normal clinic service in primary care settings. Materials and Method: This was a parallel, randomised controlled study. The selected participants were patients aged 18 to 70 years with type 2 DM on diabetic medication who were being treated in Kota Samarahan Health Clinic with HbA1c above 8% and who never attended any education of DM prior to the study. The control group received normal clinic visits with consultations by a medical officer. The intervention group received four or more DMTAC visits in addition to normal clinic visits. The primary outcomes were HbA1c while the secondary outcomes were the occurrence of severe hypoglycaemia, weight gain and medication compliance of patients. The subjects were randomised by numbered envelope opened chronologically by the investigator during the initial assessment. All health care professionals (nurse, lab staff and medical officer) except DMTAC pharmacist managing the subjects were blinded as there were no markings on the patients notes indicating that they were in this study. The demographic data was collected during screening while health data including glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels were collected at baseline, sixth month and one year. Results: In all, 100 patients were randomised into control and intervention groups (n=50 per arm). The change of HbA1c in the intervention group (mean=-1.58) was significantly more than the control group (mean=-0.48) at 12 months with a mean difference of -1.10% (p=0.005, Cohen's d=0.627). Both study groups had similar significant changes of subjects from non-compliance to compliance (control group, n=11 vs. intervention group, n=10). The changes of BMI after 12 months between control group (0.24 kg/m2 ) and intervention group (0.24 kg/m2 ) was not significant (p=0.910). There were no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia detected in both groups. Conclusion: The addition of DMTAC service in primary care can improve glycaemic control among patients. The study was registered in the National Medical Research Register (Malaysia): NMRR-13-1449-18955 FUNDING: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. All blood test was done in our setting.

Haematological cellular structures may be elucidated using automated full blood count (FBC) analysers such as Unicel DxH 800 via cell population data (CPD) analysis. The CPD values are generated by calculating volume, conductivity, and five types of scatter angles of individual cells which would form clusters or populations. This study considered 126 CPD parameter values of 1077 healthy Malaysian adults to develop reference intervals for each CPD parameter. The utility of the CPD reference interval established may range from understanding the normal haematological cellular structures to analysis of distinct cellular features related to the development of haematological disorders and malignancies.