jective: Cyber bullying is a combination of the word cyber and bullying where cyber basically means the Internet or on-line. In this case, cyber bullying will focus on getting in action with bullying by using the Internet or modern technologies such as on-line chats, online media and short messaging texts through social media. The current review aims to compile and summarize the results of relevant publications related to “cyber bullying." The review also includes discussing on relevant variables related to cyber bullying. Methods: Information from relevant publications addresses the demographics, prevalence, differences between cyber bullying and traditional bullying, bullying motivation, avenues to overcome it, preventions, coping mechanisms in relation to “cyber bullying” were retrieved and summarized. Results: The prevalence of cyber bullying ranges from 30% - 55% and the contributing risk factors include positive association with perpetration, non-supportive school environment, and Internet risky behaviors. Both males and females have been equal weigh on being perpetrators and victims. The older groups with more technology exposures are more prone to be exposed to cyber bullying. With respect to individual components of bullying, repetition is less evident in cyber bullying and power imbalance is not measured by physicality but in terms of popularity and technical knowledge of the perpetrator. Conclusion: Due to the limited efforts centralized on the intervention, future researchers should focus on testing the efficacy of possible interventional programs and the effects of different roles in the intervention in ord

Introduction: This study aimed to determine the views and practices of healthcare providers and barriers they encountered when implementing the national health screening program for men in a public primary care setting in Malaysia. Methods: An online survey was conducted among healthcare providers across public health clinics in Malaysia. All family medicine specialists, medical officers, nurses and assistant medical officers involved in the screening program for adult men were invited to answer a 51-item questionnaire via email or WhatsApp. The questionnaire comprised five sections: participants’ socio-demographic information, current screening practices, barriers and facilitators to using the screening tool, and views on the content and format of the screening tool. Results: A total of 231 healthcare providers from 129 health clinics participated in this survey. Among them, 37.44% perceived the implementation of the screening program as a “top-down decision.” Although 37.44% found the screening tool for adult men “useful,” some felt that it was “time consuming” to fill out (38.2%) and “lengthy” (28.3%). In addition, ‘adult men refuse to answer’ (24.1%) was cited as the most common patient-related barrier. Conclusions: This study provided useful insights into the challenges encountered by the public healthcare providers when implementing a national screening program for men. The screening tool for adult men should be revised to make it more user-friendly. Further studies should explore the reasons why men were reluctant to participate in health screenings, thus enhancing the implementation of screening programs in primary care.

Introduction: In the primary care setting, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) overutilisation often stems from the failure to discontinue prophylaxis treatment prior to tertiary care discharge and consider step-down therapy following discharge. Long-term PPI use can result in potential drug-related problems and unnecessary drug expenditure. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacist-structured review in reducing inappropriate PPI prescriptions and estimate the potential cost saving. Methods: This non-randomised controlled study was conducted for 16 weeks at 17 government health clinics in Selangor, Malaysia. Eligible patients attending the outpatient pharmacies of intervention clinics were recruited consecutively and their consent was obtained. A structured review of PPIs was performed in which pharmacists identified patient demographics, indications and the length of PPI therapy using a PPI intervention form. Recommendations were discussed with physicians before prescription changes were made and documented. Moreover, standard management was conducted in the control clinics. Results: A total of 568 patients with prescriptions containing PPIs were sampled, with a total of 284 patients being placed into the control and intervention groups, respectively. Compared to the control group, inappropriate PPI utilisation in the intervention group significantly decreased from 79.9 to 30.4% (p<0.05). The changes to PPI prescriptions observed in the intervention group included: stop PPI therapy (30.8%), step-down therapy (22.9%), start substitution therapy (15.9%) and no change (30.4%). The physicians’ acceptance rate for pharmacist intervention was 67.8%. A 66.1% reduction in monthly PPI pill count and a 72.0% reduction in monthly medication expenditure (RM44.85/patient/year) were observed. Conclusion: The pharmacist-structured review was effective in increasing appropriate PPI utilisation and led to substantial cost savings.