METHOD: Type 2 diabetes mellitus patients (n = 73) attending endocrine clinic at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre (UKMMC) were randomised to either control (n = 36) or intervention group (n = 37) after screening. Patients in the intervention group received an intervention from a pharmacist during the enrolment, after three and six months of the enrolment. Outcome measures such as HbA1c, BMI, lipid profile, Morisky scores and quality of life (QoL) scores were assessed at the enrolment and after 6 months of the study in both groups. Patients in the control group did not undergo intervention or educational module other than the standard care at UKMMC.

RESULTS: HbA1c values reduced significantly from 9.66% to 8.47% (P = 0.001) in the intervention group. However, no significant changes were noted in the control group (9.64-9.26%, P = 0.14). BMI values showed significant reduction in the intervention group (29.34-28.92 kg/m(2); P = 0.03) and lipid profiles were unchanged in both groups. Morisky adherence scores significantly increased from 5.83 to 6.77 (P = 0.02) in the intervention group; however, no significant change was observed in the control group (5.95-5.98, P = 0.85). QoL profiles produced mixed results.

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%).

METHOD: A cross-sectional study was planned to approach potential respondents for the study. A self-administered questionnaire was delivered to community pharmacists/pharmacy technicians (N=292) practising in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

RESULTS: The overall response to the survey was 69.5% (n=203). The majority of the sample was comprised of pharmacy technicians (152, 74.9%) who possessed a diploma in pharmacy, followed by pharmacists (37, 18.2%) and others (12, 5.9%). Overall, 72 (35.5%) of the respondents disclosed that they had experienced an ADR at their pharmacy, yet more than half (105, 51.7%) were not familiar with the existence of an ADR reporting body in Bangladesh. Exploring the barriers to the reporting of ADRs, it was revealed that the top four barriers to ADR reporting were 'I do not know how to report (Relative Importance Index (RII)=0.998)', 'reporting forms are not available (0.996)', 'I am not motivated to report (0.997)' and 'Unavailability of professional environment to discuss about ADR (RII=0.939)'. In addition to these, a majority (141, 69.46%) were not confident about the classification of ADRs (RII=0.889) and were afraid of legal liabilities associated with reporting ADRs (RII=0.806). Moreover, a lack of knowledge about pharmacotherapy and the detection of ADRs was another major factor hindering their reporting (RII=0.731).

METHODS: A self-administered KAP questionnaire was distributed to a convenience sample of pharmacists in Kuala Lumpur identified from the list of licensed community pharmacists in Malaysia year 2014.

KEY FINDINGS: Questionnaires were returned by 111 pharmacists of 143 distributed (response rate, 78%). Most of the respondents (82%) were not trained in travel medicine. Overall, mean knowledge score was 4.4 ( ± 1.7), indicating a moderate level of knowledge on a variety of travel-related health issues. Community pharmacists who graduated from foreign universities possessed significantly higher knowledge scores than did those who graduated locally (P < 0.05). The majority had a positive attitude towards travel medicine. A vast majority provided travel medicine advice mainly to adults who travel as tourists, and the primary travel advice given was on traveller's diarrhoea.