Introduction: Conventional Chest Physiotherapy (CCPT) remains the mainstay of treatment for sputum mobilization in patients with productive cough such as bronchiectasis and “Chronic Obstructive Airway Disease” (COPD). However CCPT is time consuming requires the assistance of a physiotherapist and limits the independence of the patient. Mechanical percussors which are electrical devices used to provide percussion to the external chest wall might provide autonomy and greater compliance. We compared safety and efficacy of a mechanical chest percusser devised by Formedic Technology with conventional chest percussion. Methods: Twenty patients (mean age 64years) were randomly assigned to receive either CCPT or mechanical percussor on the first day and crossed over by “Latin square randomisation” to alternative treatment for 6 consecutive days and the amount of sputum expectorated was compared by dry and wet weight. Adverse events and willingness to use was assessed by a home diary and a questionnaire. Results: There were 13 males and 7 females, eight diagnosed as bronchiectasis and 12 COPD. The mean dry weight of sputum induced by CCPT (0.54g + 0.32) was significantly more compared with MP (0.40g + 0.11); p-value = 0.002. The mean wet weight of sputum with CCPT (10.71g + 8.70) was also significantly more compared with MP (5.99g + 4.5); p-value < 0.001. There were no significant difference in adverse events and majority of patients were willing to use the device by themselves. Conclusion: The mechanical percussor although produces less sputum is well tolerated and can be a useful adjunct to CCPT

Background: Many smokers have undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease(COPD), and yet screening for COPD is not recommended. Smokers who know that they haveairflow limitation are more likely to quit smoking. This study aims to identify the prevalence andpredictors of airflow limitation among smokers in primary care.Methods: Current smokers ≥ 40 years old who were asymptomatic clinic attendees in aprimary care setting were recruited consecutively for two months. We used a two-step strategy.Step 1: participants filled in a questionnaire. Step 2: Assessment of airflow limitation using apocket spirometer. Multiple logistic regression was utilised to determine the best risk predictorsfor airflow limitation.Results: Three hundred participants were recruited. Mean age was 58.35 (SD 10.30) yearsold and mean smoking history was 34.56 pack-years (SD 25.23). One in two smokers were found tohave airflow limitation; the predictors were Indian ethnicity, prolonged smoking pack-year historyand Lung Function Questionnaire score ≤ 18. Readiness to quit smoking and the awareness ofCOPD were low.Conclusions: The high prevalence of airflow limitation and low readiness to quit smokingimply urgency with helping smokers to quit smoking. Identifying airflow limitation as an additionalmotivator for smoking cessation intervention may be considered. A two-step case-finding methodis potentially feasible.

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airway which is often misdiagnosed and undertreated. Early diagnosis and vigilant asthma control are crucial to preventing permanent airway damage, improving quality of life and reducing healthcare burdens. The key approaches to asthma management should include patient empowerment through health education and selfmanagement and, an effective patient-healthcare provider partnership.

Background: Regarding the long-term safety issues with the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and the clinical predominance of dual bronchodilators in enhancing treatment outcomes in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ICS is no longer a “preferred therapy” according to the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease except on top of a dual bronchodilator. This has necessitated a change in the current therapy for many COPD patients. Objective: To determine a standardised algorithm to reassess and personalise the treatment COPD patients based on the available evidence. Methods: A consensus statement was agreed upon by a panel of pulmonologists in from 11 institutes in Malaysia whose members formed this consensus group. Results: According to the consensus, which was unanimously adopted, all COPD patients who are currently receiving an ICS-based treatment should be reassessed based on the presence of co-existence of asthma or high eosinophil counts and frequency of moderate or severe exacerbations in the previous 12 months. When that the patients meet any of the aforementioned criteria, then the patient can continue taking ICS-based therapy. However, if the patients do not meet the criteria, then the treatment of patients need to be personalised based on whether the patient is currently receiving long-acting beta-agonists (LABA)/ICS or triple therapy. Conclusion: A flowchart of the consensus providing a guidance to Malaysian clinicians was elucidated based on evidences and international guidelines that identifies the right patients who should receive inhaled corticosteroids and enable to switch non ICS based therapies in patients less likely to benefit from such treatments.

Introduction: Pneumonia continues to be as one of the top causes of hospitalisations and deaths in Malaysia despite the advancement in prevention and treatment of pneumonia. One of the possible explanations is the frequent misdiagnosis of pneumonia which had been reported elsewhere but such data is not available locally. Objectives: This is an audit project aiming to evaluate the proportion of misdiagnosis among hospitalised communityacquired pneumonia (CAP) patients in the Respiratory wards of Penang General Hospital based on their initial presentation data, and their associated outcomes. Methods: We reviewed the medical notes and initial chest radiographs of 188 CAP patients who were admitted to respiratory wards. Misdiagnosis was defined as cases which lack suggestive clinical features and/or chest radiograph changes. In-hospital mortality and length of stay (LOS) were the outcomes of interest. Results: The study found that 38.8% (n=73) of the hospitalised CAP patients were misdiagnosed. The most common alternative diagnosis was upper respiratory tract infection (32.8%, n=24). There was no statistical difference between misdiagnosis and CAP patients in the demographic and clinical variables collected. In terms of outcomes, misdiagnosed patients were discharged earlier (mean LOS= 3.5±3.28 days vs. 7.7±15.29 days, p=0.03) but the in-hospital mortality difference was not statistically significant (p=0.07). Conclusions: One third of our CAP admissions were misdiagnosed. Although initial misdiagnosis of CAP in our study did not show any increase in mortality or morbidity, a proper diagnosis of CAP will be helpful in preventing inappropriate prescription of antibiotics and unnecessary admission.