Introduction: Giving two intravenous anaesthetic agents simultaneously generally results in an additive effect. The aim of this study was to investigate the interaction between propofoland thiopental when given to patients who have had sedative premedication. Methods: Fifty patients were admitted into the study. All patients received oral midazolam 3.75mg and intravenous fentanyl 100mg before induction of anaesthesia. Twenty patients received an infusion of their propofol or thiopental while 30 patients received an infusion of an admixture of both drugs. Results: The interaction between propofol and thiopental was additive. The average dose at loss of the eyelash reflex for propofol and thiopental was 0.71mg kg-1 and 1.54mg kg-1 respectively. Premedication decreased the induction dose by 38.2%. Conclusion: Propofol and thiopental interact in an additive fashion when given at induction of anaesthesia

Introduction and Objectives There are limited studies conducted on the needs of cancer survivorsin developing countries like Malaysia. This qualitative study aimed at exploring the post-treatmentimpact and needs of prostate cancer survivors.Method: A qualitative study design was used. One in-depth interview and four focus groupdiscussions were conducted with 24 prostate cancer survivors (age range: 58–79 years) fromgovernment and private hospitals in Malaysia in 2013. Trained researchers used a topic guide toguide the interviews, which were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, checked and managed withNvivo 10 software. A thematic approach was used to analyse the data.Result: Three main themes emerged from the analysis: (a) impact of prostate cancer on thesurvivors, (b) support needed for coping and (c) information needs. Prostate cancer has animportant impact on the survivors’ lifestyle after treatment. Some of them have to live with thepost-treatment side effects. They were anxious about the possibility of relapse. In addition tofamily and peer support, there were participants who felt that spiritual support was important inhelping them cope with the possibility of relapse. The survivors felt that they did not receive enoughinformation about post-treatment care, dietary measures and supplements for relapse prevention,treatment and prognosis.Conclusion: Prostate cancer has a significant impact on the survivor’s lifestyle, emotional andphysical health. They need information and emotional support from the healthcare professionals,family and peers. Therefore, it is important for healthcare providers to explore the needs of prostatecancer survivors and provide the necessary support.

INTRODUCTIONThere have been few studies on public trust in doctors and healthcare systems and this is the first in Singapore.

MATERIALS AND METHODSA cross-sectional survey was carried out in Redhill in January 2005. Citizens or Permanent Residents aged > or =18 years were randomly selected, one per household to avoid cluster bias, and 361 participated (response rate 68.7%). An interview administered questionnaire included 3 questionnaires measuring public trust: "Interpersonal Trust in Physicians Scale" for primary care doctors; "Trust in Physicians Generally Scale" for the medical profession; and "Trust in Healthcare System Scale" for the Healthcare System. Questions were answered on a Likert scale: 1. Strongly Disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree, 5. Strongly Agree. Individual transformed scores of trust (range, 0 to 100) were equally divided into 5 categories with their average being the transformed mean.

RESULTSTrust in primary care doctors (mean 59.7) had proportions (prevalence rates) of: very low 0.3%, low 2.5%, neutral 40.4%, high 54.0%, and very high 2.8%. Trust in the medical profession (mean 61.8) had proportions of: very low 1.0%, low 7.7%, neutral 33.7%, high 47.0%, and very high 10.5%. Trust in the healthcare system (mean 61.5) had proportions of: very low 0.5%, low 4.1%, neutral 40.0%, high 48.7%, and very high 6.7%. For areas of the healthcare system, proportions of high/very high trust were: "Healthcare Providers' Expertise" (70.8%), "Quality of Care" (61.5%), "Patient Focus of Providers" (58.7%), "Information Supply and Communication by Care Providers" (52.3%), "Quality of Cooperation" (43.3%), and Policies of the Healthcare System" (24.6%).

CONCLUSIONSWhile low proportions had low/very low trust, the high proportions with neutral trust and the rather low level of trust in "Policies of the Healthcare System" are causes for concern.

Adolescent ; Adult ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Delivery of Health Care ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Physician-Patient Relations ; Physicians, Family ; Public Opinion ; Singapore ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Trust