Objective: To compare the clinical presentation, severity and progression of primary angle closure between Chinese and Malays residing in Malaysia. Methods: A comparative retrospective record review study was conducted involving one hundred (200 eyes) Malay and fifty eight (116 eyes) Chinese patients. They were selected from medical records of Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan and Hospital Pulau Pinang, Penang, Malaysia. The selected patients were re-diagnosed based on the International Society of Geographical and Epidemiological classification. The clinical data on presentation including the presence of systemic diseases were documented. Progression of the disease was based on available reliable visual fields and optic disc changes of patients who have been on follow-up for at least five years. Results: Malay patients presented at older age (61.4 years SD 8.4) compared to Chinese (60.6 years SD 8.3). There was significant higher baseline Intraocular Pressure (IOP) among Malays (34.7 SD 18.5mmHg) compared to Chinese (30.3 SD 16.7mmHg) (p=0.032). The Chinese patients presented with significantly better visual acuity (p<0.001) and less advanced cup to disc changes (p=0.001) compared to Malays. Malay patients progressed faster than the Chinese. Majority progressed within 1 year of diagnosis. Malays without laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) have a 4 fold (95% CI 1.4, 10.9) risk of progression. Higher baseline IOP, more advanced visual field defect and absence of LPI was identified as significant predictors associated with progression. Conclusion: The Malays presented with more advanced angle closure glaucoma as compared to the Chinese in Malaysia. Aggressive disease progression was observed in Malays with the onset of optic neuropathy. Effective public awareness and aggressive management is important to prevent blindness in the Malaysian population.

Medication review is an intervention with the potential to reduce drug-related problems (DRPs) in the elderly. This study aimed to determine the effect of pharmacists’ medication reviews on geriatric patients. This study accessed two online databases, MEDLINE Complete and Scopus, and examined all studies published in English between 2019 and 2023, except for reviews. The studies included (1) participants over 65 years of age and (2) medication reviews conducted by pharmacists. The titles, abstracts, and full texts were reviewed for data extraction to determine whether the studies satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Forty-four of the initial 709 articles were included in this study. The articles included discussions on the incidence rates of DRPs and potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) (n=21), hospitalization (n=14), medication adherence (n=9), quality of life (QoL) (n=8), and falls (n=7). Pharmacist medication reviews were associated with a reduced incidence of DRPs and PIMs, and improved adherence to medications. Patients’ overall QoL is also increasing. However, pharmacist medication reviews were not strongly associated with decreased hospitalization or falls. A pharmacist’s medication review may be a feasible intervention for reducing the incidence rates of DRPs and PIMs, regardless of whether it is performed as a sole intervention or supplemented with other interventions. The intervention was also effective in increasing medication adherence and QoL.

Introduction: Hepatic diseases patients are especially prone to malnutrition, which is often underestimated. Screening tools were developed to detect the risk of malnutrition. However, screening tools for patients with liver disease were frequently underestimated. Fluid overload is the main issue to perform nutritional screening in liver disease patients. Therefore, this study aimed to validate the Royal Free Hospital Nutritional Prioritizing Tool (RFH-NPT) among patients and to evaluate association between RFH-NPT, Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002) and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA). Methods: This cross sectional study was conducted in 3 phases; transcultural adaptation, criterion validity and reliability phases. Content validity was confirmed by interviewing eight liver disease professionals. Face validity was assessed by surveying forty nurses working in the liver disease ward. In addition, agreement between NRS 2002 and RFH-NPT assessment was assessed using the SGA tool. Results: Eighty patients with liver disease took part in this study. The SGA assessment found malnutrition in 75% of patients (95% CI, 60%–95%) while 80% (95% CI, 65%-80) were found as at risk of malnutrition using RFH- NPT. Moderate specificity and high sensitivity of RFHNPT were 97% and 74%, respectively, and 95% positive predictive value was measured. Conclusion: The RFH-NPT nutritional screening tool is the initial and most reliable in this population to assess the malnutrition risk. Thus, inclusion of the RFH-NPT with NRS 2002 demonstrated positive and a fair agreement between the SGA and RFH-NPT tool to be used as a routine nutrition screening protocol for identifying patients at risk of malnutrition.

Introduction: Food insecurity is currently a problem faced by both developing and developed nations. Issues of food insecurity reflect both social and economic challenges, posing a significant policy dilemma. Although there has been various research on food insecurity, very little has been done to better understand what are the sociodemographic factors that can predict food insecurity within a Malaysian context, especially amongst the unique community of Malay university students, which makes up the largest group of students in tertiary education. Therefore, this study examined the prevalence of food insecurity and its associated factors among Malay university students. Methods: Conducted in Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor Campus, conveniently sampled participants (n = 181) completed a pre-tested English version of the US Adult Food Security Survey Module (AFSSM) questions in 2015, which measures their level of food security status. Binary logistic regression analysis was carried out to determine the sociodemographic predictors of food insecurity among the sampled population. Results: More than one-third of participants (42.5%) reported food insecurity within the past year with 22.1% experiencing very low food insecurity. Additionally, of those who experienced food security, 5.4% reported a low food security status. However, no significant predictors were observed positively related to food insecurity. Conclusion: Data indicates that food insecurity is a significant problem among university students and additional research is needed to better understand and address food insecurity in higher education.