ABSTRACT
Purpose@#This study investigated pharmacy students’ perceptions of various aspects of virtual objective structured clinical examinations (vOSCEs) conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Malaysia. @*Methods@#This cross-sectional study involved third- and fourth-year pharmacy students at the International Islamic University Malaysia. A validated self-administered questionnaire was distributed to students who had taken a vOSCE a week before. @*Results@#Out of the 253 students who were approached, 231 (91.3%) completed the questionnaire. More than 75% of the participants agreed that the instructions and preparations were clear and helpful in familiarizing them with the vOSCE flow. It was found that 53.2% of the respondents were satisfied with the flow and conduct of the vOSCE. However, only approximately one-third of the respondents believed that the tasks provided in the vOSCE were more convenient, less stressful, and easier to perform than those in the conventional OSCE. Furthermore, 49.7% of the students favored not having a vOSCE in the future when conducting a conventional OSCE becomes feasible again. Internet connection was reported as a problem hindering the performance of the vOSCE by 51.9% of the participants. Students who were interested in clinical pharmacy courses were more satisfied than other students with the preparation and operation of the vOSCE, the faculty support, and the allocated time. @*Conclusion@#Students were satisfied with the organization and operation of the vOSCE. However, they still preferred the conventional OSCE over the vOSCE. These findings might indicate a further need to expose students to telehealthcare models.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#This study investigated pharmacy students’ perceptions of various aspects of virtual objective structured clinical examinations (vOSCEs) conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in Malaysia. @*Methods@#This cross-sectional study involved third- and fourth-year pharmacy students at the International Islamic University Malaysia. A validated self-administered questionnaire was distributed to students who had taken a vOSCE a week before. @*Results@#Out of the 253 students who were approached, 231 (91.3%) completed the questionnaire. More than 75% of the participants agreed that the instructions and preparations were clear and helpful in familiarizing them with the vOSCE flow. It was found that 53.2% of the respondents were satisfied with the flow and conduct of the vOSCE. However, only approximately one-third of the respondents believed that the tasks provided in the vOSCE were more convenient, less stressful, and easier to perform than those in the conventional OSCE. Furthermore, 49.7% of the students favored not having a vOSCE in the future when conducting a conventional OSCE becomes feasible again. Internet connection was reported as a problem hindering the performance of the vOSCE by 51.9% of the participants. Students who were interested in clinical pharmacy courses were more satisfied than other students with the preparation and operation of the vOSCE, the faculty support, and the allocated time. @*Conclusion@#Students were satisfied with the organization and operation of the vOSCE. However, they still preferred the conventional OSCE over the vOSCE. These findings might indicate a further need to expose students to telehealthcare models.
ABSTRACT
The best insulin regimen for the intensification of insulin therapy in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM] remains controversial. Despite substantial research, the body of evidence concerning the safety aspects of such regimens has never been summarized. We conducted a 14-year narrative review to compare the safety outcomes of basal-bolus [BB] versus premixed [PM] insulin regimens. We searched electronic databases [PubMed, Scopus, Proquest and Google Scholar] for English language studies published from January 2000 to December 2014 to identify studies comparing insulin intensification regimens. Only studies measuring the safety-related parameters of the specific regimens in T2DM adult patients were selected for further review. The extracted data were independently reviewed by two researchers, and disagreements were resolved by discussion. Of the 20 retrieved studies, we included 10 studies that specifically compared the safety parameters of BB and PM Insulin regimens. Among the safety outcomes measured were hypoglycaemia, weight gain and adverse events. Broadly, we determined that the BB insulin regimens were comparable to the PM insulin regimens in terms of hypoglycaemia and adverse events. In terms of weight gain, two of seven studies showed significant weight gain in BB insulin regimen arms. Generally, the safety profile of BB insulin regimen was comparable to that of the PM insulin regimen. None of the identified studies performed head to-head comparisons utilizing human insulin regimens in both arms. Research comparing non-analogue insulin regimens is warranted