MATERIALS AND METHODS: This comprehensive review is based on the content derived through a thorough literature search using 5 electronic databases such as Science direct, Springer link, PubMed, Jet P and Google scholar. Equivalent terms in thesauruses or Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) browsers were used whenever possible. We included all the articles those are used CAM medications for the treatment of arthritis around the globe and searched for the required articles published in English in peer reviewed journals from January 1999 to February 2014. Reports were then arranged and analysed on the basis of country specific studies.
RESULTS: Initially, a total of 156 articles were retrieved, after further screening, 27 articles were selected according to meet objectives of the study and those articles which did not qualify, were excluded. Seventeen appropriate studies were finally included in the review. Indeed most of the studies that fulfilled the objective of this review were carried out in US (n=8, 47%), then in India (n=2, 11.76%), UK (n=1, 5.88%), Canada (n=1, 5.88%), Australia (n=1, 5.88%), Korea (n=1, 5.88%), Thailand (n=1, 5.88%), Turkey (n=1, 5.88%) and Malaysia (n=1, 5.88%).
CONCLUSION: The review revealed that family, friend, past experiences and lack of effectiveness of conventional therapy are the major factors that influenced patients' decision of initiating and persisting with CAM therapy. The review highlighted the need to conduct future studies by using some more specific health related outcome measures.
Material and Methods: Patients with BD satisfying the International Study Group for Behçet's Disease or the International Criteria for Behçet's Disease criteria were recruited from a regional rheumatology program. The choice of anti-TNF, treatment response, and adverse events were specified. Response to treatment was evaluated by the detection of new, worsening, or improving clinical features, and management was benchmarked against current The European League against Rheumatism recommendations published in 2008.
Results: Out of the total of 22 patients, 18 (81.9%) received anti-TNF therapies, resulting in 14 (77.8%) complete and 4 (22.2%) partial remissions. Eleven (61.1%) patients switched to a second anti-TNF, seven patients (38.9%) required three different anti-TNFs, and one required a fourth anti-TNF to achieve remission. Two patients required retrials before their disease was controlled. Anti-TNF therapy included infliximab (IFX): n=15, 83.3%; adalimumab (ADA): n=9, 50%; golimumab: n=6, 33.3%; etanercept: n=5, 27.8%; and certolizumab pegol: n=2, 11.1%. Secondary failure was observed with IFX (4/15; 26.7%) and ADA (2/9; 22.2%), and these (100%) were manifested after at least 2 years of treatment. Five patients with potentially life-threatening laryngeal involvement received anti-TNFs successfully halting disease progression. Five allergic reactions were encountered, and five serious infections were documented involving three patients aged ≥ 50 years, all with the use of IFX.
Conclusion: Anti-TNF therapy induced a clinical response in 100% patients and achieved complete remission in 78% patients. It provides an effective alternative option for first-line therapy in severe BD where many conventional immunosuppressive therapies fail. Patients with BD who do not respond to one or more anti-TNFs because of intolerance, ineffectiveness, or secondary failure might benefit from switching to another drug from this group or even a retrial of a previously administered anti-TNF because unsatisfactory results with one biologic is not predictive of response to another anti-TNF. For those with potentially life-threatening destructive laryngeal manifestation, anti-TNF as a first choice may be considered.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from June to September 2012 in five private sector hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan. A convenient sample of nurses (n=377) were enrolled in this study. Data was obtained through a previously validated questionnaire. Responses were statistically analyzed using SPSSv.17.
RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned giving a response rate of 63.6% of which 20 were unusable (n=240). Out of the remaining 220, 24.1% (n=53) responded that they never or rarely interacted with a pharmacist. Respondents who expect pharmacists to collaborate with nurses to solve drug related problems were 45% (n=99). Nurses' experience of pharmacists was not substantial as only 44.5% (n=98) respondents consider pharmacists as a reliable source of clinical drug information.
CONCLUSION: The role of pharmacists is not well appreciated among nurses in Pakistan. Hence, pharmacists must bridge the observed gap and use a more strategic and consistent approach to build a more positive image in line with other healthcare professionals and in providing patient-centred pharmaceutical care. This research would impress upon the pharmacists the need to redefine their role in the healthcare settings.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among community pharmacists between March-April, 2015, using a self-administered, pre-tested questionnaire in the State of Selangor, Malaysia. A simple random sampling approach was used to select pharmacy sites. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used to analyse the data.
RESULTS: A total of 188 pharmacists responded to the survey, giving a response rate of 83.5%. The majority of participants (n = 182, 96.8%) believed that antimicrobial stewardship program helps healthcare professionals to improve the quality of patient care. However, more than half of pharmacists were neutral in their opinion about the incorporation of antimicrobial stewardship programs in community pharmacies (n = 102, 54.2%). Though collaboration was often done by pharmacists with other health professionals over the use of antibiotics (n = 104, 55.3%), a significant proportion of participants (n = 102, 54.2%) rarely/occasionally participate in antimicrobial awareness campaigns. Pharmacists having postgraduate qualification were more likely to held positive perceptions of, and were engaged in, antimicrobial stewardship than their non-postgraduate counterpart (p<0.05). Similarly, more experienced pharmacists (> 10 years) held positive perceptions towards antimicrobial stewardship (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: The study highlighted some gaps in the perception and practices of community pharmacist towards antimicrobial stewardship. Development of customized interventions would be critical to bridging these gaps and improve their perception and practices towards antimicrobial stewardship.
METHODS: A cross sectional study was conducted for 2 months among HCWs in the major district hospital of Darrang, Assam. A pre-tested, self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from the participants. Convenience sampling approach was used to collect data from different departments of the hospitals. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were used to express the results.
RESULTS: The knowledge of HCWs regarding JE was poor with a mean knowledge score of 11.02±2.39 (out of 17), while their attitudes were positive with a mean attitudes score of 43.16± 2.47 (ranging from 13 to 52). Overall, 40.4% and 74.3% of participants demonstrated good knowledge and positive attitudes respectively. Cut-off score for good knowledge and positive attitudes toward JE was set as ≥12 and >40 respectively. Older participants (40-49 years) and experienced workers (>10 years) were significantly associated with good knowledge as compared to their referent group (p<0.05), while knowledge of nurses and other orderlies were significantly lower than physicians (p<0.01). Similar factors were associated with the positive attitudes of the participants with the exception of experience. Television was the major source of information regarding JE reported by HCWs (79%).
CONCLUSION: Although the knowledge was not optimized, HCWs exhibited positive attitudes towards JE. Future research is required to design, implement and evaluate interventions to improve the knowledge of JE among HCWs.