METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 237 senior medical students (final year students and interns) using a validated self-administered questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20 for windows and comparison of difference was done using linear by linear association. A p value of less than 0.05 was taken as statistically significant.

RESULTS: The average age (standard deviation) of the respondents was 23.54 (1.39) years. Almost 5% of respondents correctly answered the question regarding the regulatory limits for bioequivalence. Almost two-thirds of respondents correctly agreed that generic medicine is bioequivalent to a brand-name medicine, and 79.3% and 72.5% of respondents correctly agreed that the medicine should be present in the same dosage form and same dose, respectively, as the brand-name medicines. However, almost half of the respondents had impression that brand-name medicines are required to meet higher safety standard than generic medicines. Almost 90% of respondents felt that advertisement by the drug companies would influence the use of brand-name medicine and they need more information about generic medicine.

METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched from inception until June 2020 for articles published in English examining the intervention provided by the pharmacist in chronic pain management. Studies investigating the impact of pharmacist intervention individually or multidisciplinary teams including pharmacists for chronic pain management were included.

RESULTS: Fourteen studies (2365 participants) were included in the current review. Six studies were randomized controlled trials while the remainder were observational studies in which pharmacists provided intervention individually or in collaboration with other healthcare professionals. Medication review was the most common intervention provided by the pharmacist. The pooled analysis found that pharmacist-led interventions reduced the pain intensity (-0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.35 to -0.09; moderate certainty) among participants with chronic pain. Opiate stewardship provided by pharmacists was effective; however, mixed results were noted on the impact of the intervention on physical functioning, anxiety, depression and quality of life. Pharmacist intervention was more expensive than treatment as usual.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of community pharmacist-led educational intervention and medication review among osteoarthritis patients.

METHODS: A 6-month cluster-randomized controlled study was conducted in 22 community pharmacies of Nepal. Patients clinically diagnosed with osteoarthritis, aged 18 years and above, with a poor knowledge level of osteoarthritis and pain management were enrolled in the study. The intervention groups were educated on osteoarthritis and pain management, and had their medications reviewed while control group received usual care. Primary outcomes evaluated for the study were the change in pain levels, knowledge, and physical functional scores at 3 and 6 months. Repeated analyses of covariance were performed to examine the outcomes.

RESULTS: A total of 158 participants were recruited for the study. The intervention group reported improvements in pain score (mean difference 0.473, 95 % CI 0.047 to 0.900) at 3 months and the end of the study (mean difference 0.469, 95 % CI 0.047 to 0.891) as compared to control. Similarly, improvement in knowledge scores were observed in the intervention group at 3 months (mean difference 5.320, 95 % CI 4.982 to 5.658) and 6 months (mean difference 5.411, 95 % CI 5.086 to 5.735). No differences were observed in other outcomes, including physical functional score, depression, and quality of life.

CONCLUSION: Community pharmacist-led intervention improved patients' knowledge of osteoarthritis and pain management. While pain scores improved, physical functional score, depression, and quality of life score remained unchanged.