PURPOSE: The proposed Men's Health Index (MHI) aims to provide a practical and systematic framework for comprehensively assessing and stratifying older men with the intention of optimising their health and functional status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed from 1980 to 2012. We specifically looked for instruments which: assess men's health, frailty and fitness; predict life expectancy, mortality and morbidities. The instruments were assessed by the researchers who then agreed on the tools to be included in the MHI. When there was disagreements, the researchers discussed and reached a consensus guided by the principle that the MHI could be used in the primary care setting targetting men aged 55-65 years. RESULTS: The instruments chosen include the Charlson's Combined Comorbidity-Age Index; the International Index of Erectile Function-5; the International Prostate Symptom Score; the Androgen Deficiency in Aging Male; the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe Frailty Instrument; the Sitting-Rising Test; the Senior Fitness Test; the Fitness Assessment Score; and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21. A pilot test on eight men was carried out and showed that the men's health index is viable. CONCLUSIONS: The concept of assessing, stratifying, and optimizing men's health should be incorporated into routine health care, and this can be implemented by using the MHI. This index is particularly useful to primary care physicians who are in a strategic position to engage men at the peri-retirement age in a conversation about their life goals based on their current and predicted health status.
Aging/*physiology ; *Health Status ; Humans ; Life Expectancy/*trends ; Male ; Men's Health/*standards/*trends

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.