Methods: The development of the model involved a systematic review of the literature using PubMed and Embase databases. Studies reporting the risk factors associated with ADE-related ED visits were included. The methodological qualities of the included studies were assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The model was mapped and validated using face and content validity by an expert panel. Deficiencies and targeted interventions were identified, and steps for the design and implementation were recommended.
Results: The literature search generated 1361 articles, of which 38 were included in the review; 41 risk factors associated with ADE-related ED visits were identified. All factors were mapped, and the model was validated through face and content validity. The model consisted of six concepts related to sociodemographic factors, clinical factors, ADE-related to ED visits, ADE while in the ED, outcomes, and consequences. Interventions could be targeted at the factors identified in each concept to prevent ADE-related ED burden.
Conclusion: A conceptual model to guide the successful design and implementation of strategies to prevent ADE-related ED visits and the occurrence of ADE at ED was developed. Clinicians should take these factors into consideration to prevent untoward events, especially when treating high-risk patients.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of CMI on medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes in Qatar.
METHODS: We developed and customised CMI for all the anti-diabetic medications used in Qatar. A randomised controlled trial in which the intervention group patients (n = 66) received the customised CMI with usual care, while the control group patients (n = 74) received usual care only, was conducted. Self-reported medication adherence and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c ) were the primary outcome measures. Glycaemic control and medication adherence parameters were measured at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months in both groups. Medication adherence was measured using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8).
RESULTS: Although the addition of CMI resulted in better glycaemic control, this did not reach statistical significance, possibly because of the short-term follow-up. The median MMAS-8 score improved from baseline (6.6 [IQR = 1.5]) to 6-month follow-up (7.0 [IQR = 1.00]) in the intervention group. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference between the intervention and the control groups in terms of MMAS-8 score at the third visit (7.0 [IQR = 1.0]) vs 6.5 (IQR = 1.25; P-value = .010).
CONCLUSION: CMI for anti-diabetic medications when added to usual care has the potential to improve medication adherence and glycaemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes. Therefore, providing better health communication and CMI to patients with diabetes is recommended.
DESIGN: We introduced the shared learning experience in clinical pharmacy and pharmacotherapeutic practice experiences involving 87 third-year and 51 fourth-year students. Both student groups undertook the practice experiences together, with third-year students working in smaller groups mentored by fourth-year students.
ASSESSMENT: A majority of the students (> 75%) believed that they learned to work as a team during their practice experiences and that the shared learning approach provided an opportunity to practice their communication skills. Similarly, most respondents (> 70%) agreed that the new approach would help them become effective members of the healthcare team and would facilitate their professional relationships in future practice. Almost two-thirds of the students believed that the shared learning enhanced their ability to understand clinical problems. However, about 31% of the pharmacy students felt that they could have learned clinical problem-solving skills equally well working only with peers from their own student group.
CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacy students in the current study generally believed that the shared-learning approach enhanced their ability to understand clinical problems and improved their communication and teamwork skills. Both groups of students were positive that they had acquired some skills through the shared-learning approach.
METHOD: Between October 2009 and April 2010, a survey was prospectively conducted among women admitted to clinics of Penang General Hospital for examination and/or treatment by using a questionnaire. Therefore, characteristics of patients diagnosed with breast cancer (n=150) were compared with control cases (n=150) admitted to hospital for non-neoplastic, non-hormone related diseases.
RESULTS: Family history of a distant relative with breast cancer (OR=2.84), history of first-degree relatives with breast cancer (OR=2.95), history of benign breast disease (OR=2.43), menstrual irregularity (OR=4.24), and use of oral contraceptive pills (OCP) (OR=2.15) were found to be significant risk factors for breast cancer in our population. Furthermore, education more than 11 years (OR=0.40), breastfeeding (OR=0.50), being employed (OR=0.45) and practicing low fat diet (OR=0.53) were strongly protective against breast cancer development.
CONCLUSION: The results emphasize the importance of conducting a series of awareness campaigns that highlights the protective role of longer breastfeeding period against breast cancer and the negative relationships between OCP use and high fat diet with this disease.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted via a validated 49-item questionnaire, administered immediately after all students completed the examination. The questionnaire comprised of questions to evaluate the content and structure of the examination, perception of OSCE validity and reliability, and rating of OSCE in relation to other assessment methods. Open-ended follow-up questions were included to generate qualitative data.
RESULTS: Over 80% of the students found the OSCE to be helpful in highlighting areas of weaknesses in their clinical competencies. Seventy-eight percent agreed that it was comprehensive and 66% believed it was fair. About 46% felt that the 15 minutes allocated per station was inadequate. Most importantly, about half of the students raised concerns that personality, ethnicity, and/or gender, as well as interpatient and inter-assessor variability were potential sources of bias that could affect their scores. However, an overwhelming proportion of the students (90%) agreed that the OSCE provided a useful and practical learning experience.
CONCLUSIONS: Students' perceptions and acceptance of the new method of assessment were positive. The survey further highlighted for future refinement the strengths and weaknesses associated with the development and implementation of an OSCE in the International Islamic University Malaysia's pharmacy curriculum.
DESIGN: A 13-station OSCE was designed and implemented in the 2007-2008 academic year as part of the assessment methods for a clinical pharmacy course. The broad competencies tested in the OSCE included: patient counseling and communication, clinical pharmacokinetics (CPK), identification and resolution of drug-related problems (DRPs), and literature evaluation/drug information provision.
ASSESSMENT: Immediately after all students completed the OSCE, a questionnaire containing items on the clarity of written instructions, difficulty of the tasks, perceived degree of learning gained and needed, and the suitability of the references or literature resources provided was administered. More than 70% of the students felt that a higher degree of learning was needed to accomplish the tasks at the 2 DRP stations and 2 CPK stations and the majority felt the written instructions provided at the phenytoin CPK station were difficult to understand. Although about 60% of the students rated OSCE as a difficult form of assessment, 75% said it should be used more and 81% perceived they learned a lot from it.
CONCLUSION: Although most students felt that the OSCE accurately assessed their skills, a majority felt the tasks required in some stations required a higher degree of learning than they had achieved. This may indicate deficiencies in the students' learning abilities, the course curriculum, or the OSCE station design. Future efforts should include providing clearer instructions at OSCE stations and balancing the complexity of the competencies assessed.
SETTING: Five medical and cardiology wards of a tertiary care center in Malaysia.
SUBJECTS: Five hundred cardiac inpatients, who received ACEIs concomitantly with other interacting drugs.
METHOD: This was a prospective cohort study of 500 patients with cardiovascular diseases admitted to Penang Hospital between January to August 2006, who received ACEIs concomitantly with other interacting drugs. ACEI-drug interactions of clinical significance were identified using available drug information resources. Drug Interaction Probability Scale (DIPS) was used to assess the causality of association between ACEI-drug interactions and the adverse outcome (hyperkalemia).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Hyperkalemia as an adverse clinical outcome of the interaction was identified from laboratory investigations.
RESULTS: Of the 489 patients included in the analysis, 48 (9.8%) had hyperkalemia thought to be associated with ACEI-drug interactions. Univariate analysis using binary logistic regression revealed that advanced age (60 years or more), and taking more than 15 medications were independent risk factors significantly associated with hyperkalemia. However, current and previous smoking history appeared to be a protective factor. Risk factors identified as predictors of hyperkalemia secondary to ACEI-drug interactions by multi-logistic regression were: advanced age (adjusted OR 2.3, CI 1.07-5.01); renal disease (adjusted OR 4.7, CI 2.37-9.39); hepatic disease (adjusted OR 5.2, CI 1.08-25.03); taking 15-20 medications (adjusted OR 4.4, CI 2.08-9.19); and taking 21-26 medications (adjusted OR 9.0, CI 1.64-49.74).
CONCLUSION: Cardiac patients receiving ACEIs concomitantly with potentially interacting drugs are at high risk of experiencing hyperkalemia. Old age, renal disease, hepatic disease, and receiving large number of medications are factors that may significantly increase their vulnerability towards this adverse outcome; thus, frequent monitoring is advocated.