METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by systematically searching electronic databases.
KEY FINDINGS: The pooled analysis of the included trials revealed that the use of uricosurics was not associated with the risk of mortality (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.12). However, there is a potential mortality benefit associated with the use of ascorbic acid (pooled OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.65-0.94).
CONCLUSIONS: The findings confirmed the safety of uricosurics in COVID-19 patients, despite their potential to cause uric acid excretion, which may possess antioxidant properties.
METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases up to June 1, 2023. Pooled odds ratio (OR) of mortality with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was generated using a random-effects model. The risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias Version 2 tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs were included: three RCTs had an overall low risk of bias, four RCTs had some concerns in the overall risk of bias, and two RCTs trials had an overall high risk of bias. The use of IVIG indicated a significant reduction in the odds of mortality (pooled OR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.50-0.96) relative to nonuse of IVIG. Subgroup analysis in patients with a severe course of COVID-19 revealed no significant reduction in the odds of mortality (pooled OR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.29-1.16).
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest exercising caution when interpreting effectiveness of IVIG in reducing mortality among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Our findings emphasize for larger trials with rigorous study designs to better understand the impact of IVIG, particularly in those with severe COVID-19.
METHODS: A systematic search of articles was conducted in scientific databases, with the latest update in May 2021. This paper systematically reviewed the clinical evidence available (randomized controlled trials, compassionate use studies, and case reports) on the use of remdesivir for patients with moderate or severe COVID-19.
RESULTS: A total of eleven studies were included: four studies based on compassionate use of remdesivir, three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trials, three randomized, open-label, phase III trials, and one case report. Clinical improvement and mortality rates in patients who used remdesivir varied across studies.
CONCLUSION: Given the current evidence, there is insufficient data to confidently recommend the use of remdesivir alone for the treatment of adult hospitalized patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19. However, remdesivir may be considered along with an anti-inflammatory agent in patients with pneumonia, on oxygen support, provided there is close monitoring of clinical and laboratory parameters and adverse events.
AREAS COVERED: A review of articles that evaluated the cost of prescribing conventional (e.g. vitamin K antagonists) and NOACs (e.g. direct thrombin inhibitors and direct factor Xa inhibitors) in older adults.
EXPERT COMMENTARY: While the use of NOACs significantly increases the cost of the initial treatment for thromboembolic disorders, they are still considered cost-effective relative to warfarin since they offer reduced risk of intracranial haemorrhagic events. The optimum anticoagulation with warfarin can be achieved by providing specialised care; clinics managed by pharmacists have been shown to be cost-effective relative to usual care. There are suggestions that genotyping the CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genes is useful for determining a more appropriate initial dose and thereby increasing the effectiveness and safety of warfarin.
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: A systematic literature search was performed in May-July 2021, in electronic databases, which included PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Web of Science. Studies were included in this systematic review if they were original articles published in English language from 2010 to 2021 and evaluated the effect of any types of educational interventions intended to improve the ability of community pharmacists to provide smoking cessation services.
RESULTS: In total, 12 studies were included for this systematic review. The effectiveness of the educational interventions across the included studies was measured using a range of outcomes, which can be broadly categorized into 3 categories, namely changes in pharmacists' self-efficacy, knowledge, and attitude toward providing smoking cessation service, changes in pharmacists' smoking cessation practices, and changes in the effectiveness of community pharmacy based smoking cessation services. Included studies reported that educational interventions can improve pharmacists' self-efficacy, knowledge, and attitude toward smoking cessation, as well as pharmacists' smoking cessation practices. Though the evidence is limited, improvement in the effectiveness of community pharmacy based smoking cessation services has also been observed.
CONCLUSION: Any form educational interventions can positively impact improve community pharmacists' self-efficacy, knowledge, and attitude toward smoking cessation, as well as pharmacists' smoking cessation practices, but it is currently uncertain whether these outcomes are able to translate into higher effectiveness of the community pharmacy based smoking cessation services.