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.
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.