METHOD: A cross-sectional study was carried out among Malaysian women in Kuala Lumpur. A total of 362 unmarried women, nulliparous and aged between 18 and 25 years old, were included in this study. Participants were conveniently recruited through online platforms as well as face to face using a self-administered questionnaire with five sections consisting of demographics, menstrual characteristics, Working ability, Location, Intensity, Days of pain, Dysmenorrhea (WaLIDD) score for diagnosing and assessing the severity of dysmenorrhea as well as an evaluation of respondents' general knowledge and practices towards dysmenorrhea. The collected data were analysed using the SPSS tool, a descriptive statistic was used to report demographic characteristics. Inferential statistics was used to report the differentiation, association, and correlations of the variables.
RESULTS: The prevalence of primary dysmenorrhea was 73.2%. It was found that the majority of the respondents had poor knowledge (60%) and poor practices (61.88%) of dysmenorrhea. The most common preventive practices among the respondents were using dietary supplements, and herbs, taking a rest and exercising. The findings also indicated that dysmenorrhea among the respondents was significantly associated with family history of dysmenorrhea (p = 0.002), monthly income (p = 0.001), and knowledge level (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Dysmenorrhea has a high prevalence among women in Malaysia in Kula Lumpur driven by low knowledge and lack of evidence-based practices among these women. Thus, it is critical for Government and healthcare authorities to promote education related to women health among Malaysian women.
METHODS: Four electronic databases including Embase, Medline (via Ovid), Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from inception until October 2019 to identify the studies reporting fentanyl related deaths. Two independent reviewers screened and selected the titles and then evaluated the full texts. Only case studies and case series were included. A structured data extraction tool was used to extract data on the number of deaths, routes of administration, concomitant drug use and toxicological data. The Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of included studies. Data were synthesized narratively.
RESULTS: Of 1251 articles identified during initial search, 8 case reports and 9 case series met the inclusion criteria. A total of 1969 deaths were reported in the included studies. Deaths were concentrated in the north American region (n = 1946) and the Nordic region (n = 22). Reported causes of death included fentanyl overdose (n = 321, 56.4%), mixed drug toxicity (n = 196, 34.5%), natural (n = 28, 4.9%), other drug toxicity (n = 10, 1.8%), fentanyl and ethanol intoxication (n = 8, 1.4%), incidental (n = 5, <1%) and aspiration (n = 1). Most common routes of use were intravenous (70.5%) and transdermal routes (23.0%). Deaths came swiftly via the intravenous route. Mean level of blood fentanyl amongst all reported deaths was 0.024 µg/mL.
CONCLUSION: Literature related to fentanyl-associated deaths predominantly come from North America. Deaths are comparatively lower or not reported in peer-reviewed publications from the rest of the world. Abuse through intravenous administration, mixed drug toxicities and self-treatment of breakthrough pain are mainly responsible for majority of the reported deaths.
AIM: We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of early versus late caffeine therapy on preterm infants' clinical outcomes.
METHOD: A retrospective matched cohort study was conducted using data of patients admitted to neonatal intensive care units of two tertiary care hospitals between January 2016 and December 2018. The clinical outcomes and mortality risk between early caffeine (initiation within 2 days of life) and late caffeine (initiation ≥ 3 days of life) were compared.
RESULTS: Ninety-five pairs matched based on gestational age were included in the study. Compared to late initiation, preterm infants with early caffeine therapy had: a shorter duration of non-invasive mechanical ventilation (median 5 days vs. 12 days; p
DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study consisting of a single group before-and-after study design.
SETTING: A public emergency hospital in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
PARTICIPANTS: 660 (preintervention) and then 498 (postintervention) handwritten physician orders, medication administration records (MRAs) and pharmacy dispensing sheets of 482 and 388 patients, respectively, from emergency wards, inpatient settings and the pharmacy department were reviewed.
INTERVENTION: The intervention consisted of a series of interactive lectures delivered by an experienced clinical pharmacist to all hospital staff members and dissemination of educational tools (flash cards, printed list of HRAs, awareness posters) designed in line with the recommendations of the Institute for Safe Medical Practices and the US Food and Drug Administration. The duration of intervention was from April to May 2011.
MAIN OUTCOME: Reduction in the incidence of HRAs use from the preintervention to postintervention study period.
FINDINGS: The five most common abbreviations recorded prior to the interventions were 'IJ for injection' (28.6%), 'SC for subcutaneous' (17.4%), drug name and dose running together (9.7%), 'OD for once daily' (5.8%) and 'D/C for discharge' (4.3%). The incidence of the use of HRAs was highest in discharge prescriptions and dispensing records (72.7%) followed by prescriptions from in-patient wards (47.3%). After the intervention, the overall incidence of HRA was significantly reduced by 52% (ie, 53.6% vs 25.5%; p=0.001). In addition, there was a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of HRAs across all three settings: the pharmacy department (72.7% vs 39.3%), inpatient settings (47.3% vs 23.3%) and emergency wards (40.9% vs 10.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist-led educational interventions can significantly reduce the use of HRAs by healthcare providers. Future research should investigate the long-term effectiveness of such educational interventions through a randomised controlled trial.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINHAL, CENTRAL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts) reference lists of retrieved articles and relevant websites were searched for randomized controlled trials published in the English language involving adults with chronic pain. Studies were included if one of the intervention arms had received pharmacist-led medication review independently or as part of a multidisciplinary intervention. Risk of bias was assessed for all the included studies.
RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 583 unique articles including 5 randomized controlled trials. Compared with control, meta-analysis showed that participants in the intervention group had: a 0.8-point reduction in pain intensity on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale at 3 months [95% confidence interval (CI), -1.28 to -0.36] and a 0.7-point reduction (95% CI, -1.19 to -0.20) at 6 months; a 4.84 point (95% CI, -7.38 to -2.29) and -3.82 point (95% CI, -6.49 to -1.14) improvement in physical functioning on a 0- to 68-point function subscale of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index at 3 and 6 months, respectively; and a significant improvement in patient satisfaction equivalent to a "small to moderate effect."
DISCUSSION: Pharmacist-led medication review reduces pain intensity and improves physical functioning and patient satisfaction. However, the clinical significance of these findings remain uncertain due to small effect size and nature of reported data within clinical trials that limits recommendation of wider clinical role of pharmacist in chronic pain management.
METHODS: A validated self-administered questionnaire was used in this cross-sectional study to collect data from final-year BPharm students enrolled at 3 government-funded universities and 1 private university in Malaysia. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis.
RESULTS: Three hundred fourteen students responded (213 from public universities and 101 from the private university). Approximately 32% of public university students and 37% of private university students ranked their own interest in pharmacy as the reason for undertaking pharmacy degree studies; 40.4% of public and 19.8% of private university respondents stated that they would enter a nonpharmacy-related career upon graduation if given the choice. Public university students ranked hospital pharmacy as their choice of first career setting (4.39, p = 0.001), while private students ranked community pharmacy first (4.1, p = 0.002). On a scale of 1 to 5, salary received the highest mean score (3.9 and 4.0, p = 0.854) as the extrinsic factor most influencing their career choice.
CONCLUSIONS: Final-year students at Malaysian public universities were most interested in hospital pharmacy practice as their first career step upon graduation, while private university students were most interested in community pharmacy. The top 3 extrinsic factors rated as significant in selecting a career destination were salary, benefits, and geographical location.
OBJECTIVES: To describe and summarize the assessment of knowledge and perceptions about CVD risk and preventive approaches among patients with T2DM.
METHODS: A scoping review methodology was adopted, and three scientific databases, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and PubMed were searched using predefined search terms. A multistage screening process that considered relevancy, publication year (2009-2019), English language, and article type (original research) was followed. We formulated research questions focused on the assessment of levels of knowledge and perceptions of the illness relevant to CVD prevention and the identification of associated patients' characteristics.
RESULTS: A total of 16 studies were included. Patients were not confident to identify CVD risk and other clinical consequences that may occur in the prognostic pathway of T2DM. Furthermore, patients were less likely to identify all CV risk factors indicating a lack of understanding of the multi-- factorial contribution of CVD risk. Patients' beliefs about medications were correlated with their level of adherence to medications for CVD prevention. Many knowledge gaps were identified, including the basic disease expectations at the time of diagnosis, identification of individuals' CVD risk factors, and management aspects. Knowledge and perceptions were affected by patients' demographic characteristics, e.g., educational level, race, age, and area of residence.
CONCLUSION: There are knowledge gaps concerning the understanding of CVD risk among patients with T2DM. The findings necessitate educational initiatives to boost CVD prevention among patients with T2DM. Furthermore, these should be individualized based on patients' characteristics, knowledge gaps, disease duration, and estimated CVD risk.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed the published studies to assess the association of RAS inhibitors with mortality as well as disease severity in COVID-19 patients. A systematic literature search was performed to retrieve relevant original studies investigating mortality and severity (severe/critical disease) in COVID-19 patients with and without exposure to RAS inhibitors.
RESULTS: A total of 59 original studies were included for qualitative synthesis. Twenty-four studies that reported adjusted effect sizes (24 studies reported mortality outcomes and 16 studies reported disease severity outcomes), conducted in RAS inhibitor-exposed and unexposed groups, were pooled in random-effects models to estimate overall risk. Quality assessment of studies revealed that most of the studies included were of fair quality. The use of an ACEI/ARB in COVID-19 patients was significantly associated with lower odds (odds ratio [OR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.95; n = 18,749) or hazard (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.75, 95% CI 0.60-0.95; n = 26,598) of mortality compared with non-use of ACEI/ARB. However, the use of an ACEI/ARB was non-significantly associated with lower odds (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.75-1.10; n = 7446) or hazard (HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.33-1.66; n = 6325) of developing severe/critical disease compared with non-use of an ACEI/ARB.
DISCUSSION: Since there was no increased risk of harm, the use of RAS inhibitors for hypertension and other established clinical indications can be maintained in COVID-19 patients.
AREAS COVERED: We discussed various aspects of pharmacotherapeutic management in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: (i) susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 among individuals with diabetes, (ii) glycemic goals for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and concurrent diabetes, (iii) pharmacological treatment considerations for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and concurrent diabetes.
EXPERT OPINION: The glycemic goals in patients with COVID-19 and concurrent type 1 (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are to avoid disruption of stable metabolic state, maintain optimal glycemic control, and prevent adverse glycemic events. Patients with T1DM require insulin therapy at all times to prevent ketosis. The management strategies for patients with T2DM include temporary discontinuation of certain oral antidiabetic agents and consideration for insulin therapy. Patients with T2DM who are relatively stable and able to eat regularly may continue with oral antidiabetic agents if glycemic control is satisfactory. Hyperglycemia may develop in patients with systemic corticosteroid treatment and should be managed upon accordingly.
METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was conducted among community pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in the capital of Yemen, Sana'a. A total of 289 community pharmacies were randomly selected. The validated and pilot-tested questionnaire consisted of six sections: demographic data, knowledge about pharmacovigilance, experience with ADR reporting, attitudes toward ADR reporting, and the facilitators to improve ADR reporting.
RESULTS: A total of 428 pharmacy technicians and pharmacists were contacted and 179 went on to complete a questionnaire (response rate: 41.8%). Of the 179 respondents, 21 (11.7%) were pharmacists and 158 (88.3%) were pharmacy technicians, of which, 176 (98.3%) were male and 3 (1.7%) were female. The mean age of the respondents was 25.87±2.63 years. There was a significant difference between the pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in terms of knowledge scores (P<0.05). The mean knowledge scores for pharmacists was 3.33±2.852 compared to 0.15±0.666 for pharmacy technicians. With regard to attitudes toward ADR reporting, all pharmacists (100%) showed a positive attitude, while only 43% of pharmacy technicians showed a positive attitude.
CONCLUSION: Pharmacists have a significantly better knowledge than pharmacy technicians with regard to pharmacovigilance. More than half of pharmacy technicians showed a negative attitude toward ADR reporting. Therefore, educational interventions and training is very important for community pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in Yemen to increase their awareness and participation in ADR reporting.
METHODS: Cross-sectional survey design was used for the present study. Pricing data from ten counties including one from South-East Asia, two from Western Pacific and seven from Eastern Mediterranean regions were used in this study. Purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted mean unit prices for 26 anti-cancer drug presentations (similar pharmaceutical form, strength, and pack size) were used to compare prices of anti-cancer drugs across three regions. A structured form was used to extract relevant data. Data were entered and analysed using Microsoft Excel®.
RESULTS: Overall, Taiwan had the lowest mean unit prices while Oman had the highest prices. Six (23.1%) and nine (34.6%) drug presentations had a mean unit price below US$100 and between US$100 and US$500 respectively. Eight drug presentations (30.7%) had a mean unit price of more than US$1000 including cabazitaxel with a mean unit price of $17,304.9/vial. There was a direct relationship between income category of the countries and their mean unit price; low-income countries had lower mean unit prices. The average PPP-adjusted unit prices for countries based on their income level were as follows: low middle-income countries (LMICs): US$814.07; high middle income countries (HMICs): US$1150.63; and high income countries (HICs): US$1148.19.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a great variation in pricing of anticancer drugs in selected countires and within their respective regions. These findings will allow policy makers to compare prices of anti-cancer agents with neighbouring countries and develop policies to ensure accessibility and affordability of anti-cancer drugs.