Methods: We conducted a three-day course in February 2011 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. It was developed to provide attendees with the essential knowledge and skills to become a medication safety officer. Teaching methodologies included didactic teaching, group discussions, case presentations, and an independent study of medication safety materials. The content of the course focused on the various roles of a medication safety officer, the importance of medication safety in a health care setting, the incidence of adverse drug events in a hospital setting, strategies to identify and prevent adverse events, the use of root cause analysis and failure mode and effect analysis, the role of an officer in hospital accreditation, and ways for promoting safety culture. Assessment of the course outcome was accomplished by comparing scores of knowledge level before and after the course. The knowledge level was assessed by a 20-item exam which was developed and validated by course instructors.
Results: Twenty-one participants attended the course and completed both the baseline and after-course assessment questionnaires. The majority was male (N = 14, % = 66.7) with a job experience of 1-5 five years (N = 10, % = 47.6). The knowledge score increased from 14.3 ± 1.90 (mean ± standard deviation) at baseline to 18.5 ± 1.43 after successfully completing the course (P
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross sectional study adopting the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) was conducted. All cancer patients attending Penang General Hospital between August-November 2011 were approached. Descriptive statistics were used to assess demographic and disease related characteristics of the patients. All analyses were performed using SPSS v 16.0.
RESULTS: Three hundred and ninety three cancer patients met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. The mean age was 53.9 (SD±13) years. The cohort was dominated by females (n=260, 66.2%). Nearly half (n=190, 48.3%) of the participants were of Malay ethnicity, practicing Islam as their religion (n=194, 49.4%). Two hundred and ninety six (n=296, 75.3%) had beene diagnosed with cancer within six months to 3 years previously. The most common primary cancer site was breast (n=143, 36.4%). The mean Global Health Status (GHS) score was 60.7 (SD=21.3). Females (mean GHS score of 62.3, p=0.035) with Malay ethnicity (mean GHS score of 63.8, p=0.047), practicing Islam as their religion (mean GHS score of 63.0, p=0.011) had better GHS scores. Patients having medical insurance had good scores (mean 65.6, p=0.021). Marital status was significantly associated with GHS scores (p=0.022). Bone cancer patientshad the lowest mean GHS score of 49.2 (p=0.044). Patients at very advanced stages of cancer featured a low GHS mean score of 52.2 (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The present study identified many demographic and disease related factors which may contribute to the HRQoL of cancer patients, pointing to the necessity for improved management of disease symptoms and provision of psychological and financial support.
METHODS: A qualitative approach was used to gain an in-depth knowledge of the issues. By using a semi-structured interview guide, 12 CPs practicing in the city of Lahore, Pakistan were conveniently selected. All interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, and were then analyzed for thematic contents by the standard content analysis framework.
RESULTS: Thematic content analysis yielded five major themes. (1) Familiarity with EPS, (2) current practice of EPS, (3) training needed to provide EPS, (4) acceptance of EPS and (5) barriers toward EPS. Majority of the CPs were unaware of EPS and only a handful had the concept of extended services. Although majority of our study respondents were unaware of pharmaceutical care, they were ready to accept practice change if provided with the required skills and training. Lack of personal knowledge, poor public awareness, inadequate physician-pharmacist collaboration and deprived salary structures were reported as barriers towards the provision of EPS at the practice settings.
CONCLUSION: Although the study reported poor awareness towards EPS, the findings indicated a number of key themes that can be used in establishing the concept of EPS in Pakistan. Over all, CPs reported a positive attitude toward practice change provided to the support and facilitation of health and community based agencies in Pakistan.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a validated self-administered questionnaire. A convenience sample of 147 community pharmacists working in community pharmacies in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
RESULTS: The questionnaire was distributed to 147 pharmacists, of whom 104 responded to the survey, a 70.7% response rate. The mean age of participants was 29 years. The majority (n = 101, 98.1%) had graduated with a bachelorette degree and worked in chain pharmacies (n = 68, 66.7%). Only 23 (22.1%) said they were familiar with the ADR reporting process, and only 21 (20.2%) knew that pharmacists can submit ADR reports online. The majority of the participants (n = 90, 86.5%) had never reported ADRs. Reasons for not reporting ADRs most importantly included lack of awareness about the method of reporting (n = 22, 45.9%), misconception that reporting ADRs is the duty of physician and hospital pharmacist (n = 8, 16.6%) and ADRs in community pharmacies are simple and should not be reported (n = 8, 16.6%). The most common approach perceived by community pharmacists for managing patients suffering from ADRs was to refer him/her to a physician (n = 80, 76.9%).
CONCLUSION: The majority of community pharmacists in Riyadh have poor knowledge of the ADR reporting process. Pharmacovigilance authorities should take necessary steps to urgently design interventional programs in order to increase the knowledge and awareness of pharmacists regarding the ADR reporting process.