ABSTRACT
Introduction: Malaysia is one of the hardest-hit countries by COVID-19 in Asia. The rapidly rising number of cases had sparked fear among healthcare providers. This study aimed to assess the determinants of fear towards COVID-19 among healthcare providers in primary care settings. Method: This online-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 1280 healthcare providers aged ≥18 years from 30 primary care clinics in the state of Selangor, Malaysia. The Fear of COVID-19 Scale was used to assess the level of fear, and the results were analysed using multiple linear regression. Results: The mean age of the respondents was 36 years, and the mean working experience was 11 years. The majority of the respondents were women (82.4%) and Malays (82.3%). The factors that were significantly correlated with higher levels of fear were underlying chronic disease (ß=1.12, P=0.002, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.08, 3.15), concern about mortality from COVID-19 (ß=3.3, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.19, 7.22), higher risk of exposure (ß=0.8, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.14, 5.91), concern for self at work (ß=2.8, P=0.002, 95% CI=0.08, 3.10) and work as a nurse (ß=3.6, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.30, 7.52), medical laboratory worker (ß=3.0, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.12, 4.27) and healthcare assistant (ß=3.9, P<0.001, 95% CI=0.17, 5.73). The level of fear was inversely correlated with a higher work-related stress management score (ß=-0.9, P<0.001, 95% CI=-0.14, -5.07) and a higher sleep quality score (ß=-1.8, P<0.001, 95% CI=-0.28, -10.41). Conclusion: Family physicians should be vigilant and identify healthcare providers at risk of developing COVID-19-related fear to initiate early mental health intervention.
ABSTRACT
AIM: The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of system-based intervention in reducing the incidence of diabetes and to improve the postnatal metabolic profiles among women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: For women in the intervention arm (n = 130), they received one session of individualized health education at 36 gestational weeks, a booklet of diabetes prevention, five-session of postpartum booster educational program which were conducted including 1 session of dietary and exercise counseling by dietician and physiotherapist at 6 weeks postpartum. For women in the control group (n = 168), standard treatment whereby they had received group therapy on diet and physical activity modification by dietician and staff nurses during the antenatal period. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups for most of the variables examined except for educational level which the control group had a higher education than the intervention group. The women assigned to system-based intervention have a significant difference to GDM women who were assigned to the control group for LDL and HDL but not in anthropometric measurements, blood pressure, glucose index, total cholesterol, and triglyceride. In addition, it was found that the incidence of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) 2 years after delivery was 20% in the intervention arm compared to 17% in the control arm. CONCLUSION: The system-based intervention was not statistically superior to the control intervention as there is no difference in terms of incidence of T2DM between the intervention and control group. We, therefore, suggested that more intensive interventions are needed to prevent GDM from developing into T2DM.
