MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study was carried out to evaluate the prescribing, and dispensing errors in outpatients who seek patient counseling at the tertiary care multispecialty hospital. The data were collected from various sources such as patient's prescriptions and dispensing records from the pharmacy.
RESULTS: A total of 500 prescriptions were screened and identified 65.60% of prescriptions with at least any one type of medication errors. Out of 328 prescriptions, 96.04% were handwritten and 3.96% were computerised prescriptions. Among the 328 prescriptions with medication errors, 32.62% noticed prescribing errors, 37.80% with dispensing errors, and 29.58% with both prescribing and dispensing errors. Out of these 328 prescriptions, 74.09% prescriptions were found to have polypharmacy.
DISCUSSION: Medication errors are serious problems in healthcare and can be a source of significant morbidity and mortality in healthcare settings. The present study showed that dispensing errors were the most common among the types of medication errors, in these particularly wrong directions were the most common types of errors.
CONCLUSION: This study concludes that the overall prevalence of medication errors was around 80%, but there were no life-threatening events observed. A clinical pharmacist can play a major role in this situation appears to be a strong intervention and early detection and prevention of medication errors and thus can improve the quality of care to the patients.
METHODS USED TO CONDUCT THE REVIEW: This review was conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) recommendation. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Databases and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to March 2017 for relevant trials. The methodological quality of included trials was assessed by using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Case-Control and Cohort Studies. A meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effect model to combine the rate of mortality and length of stay outcomes.
FINDINGS OF THE REVIEW: Nine observational trials involving 2128 patients were considered eligible for inclusion. Although based on low quality evidence, there was a statistically significant difference in favour of the impact of de-escalation on hospital stay but not mortality (MD -5.96 days; 95% CI -8.39 to -3.52).
INTERPRETATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This review highlights the need for more rigorous studies to be carried out before a firm conclusion on the benefit of de-escalation therapy is supported.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 134 postgraduate trainees from the departments of general surgery (Surgical), orthopaedic surgery (Ortho), otorhinolaryngology (ENT), obstetrics and gynaecology (OBGYN), as well as anaesthesiology and intensive care (Anaesth) were recruited. A validated questionnaire was used to assess awareness and knowledge. All participants attended a medical-education session and completed the questionnaire as preassessment and postassessment. Data were analysed, and comparisons between disciplines were conducted.
RESULTS: The trainees' awareness of LAST was overall poor at preassessment which improved almost 6-folds at postassessment. Surprisingly, only 20 (45.5%) participants from the anaesthesiology group had awareness of LAST at preassessment, and none of the participants were from surgical, orthopaedic, and obstetrics and gynaecology departments. Preassessment scores were significantly higher in the anaesth group as compared to all other groups; with a difference in the average score for Anaesth vs Surgical of 3.46 (95%, CI:2.17, 4.74), Anaesth vs Ortho of 3.64 (95%, CI:2.64, 4.64), Anaesth vs ENT of 3.43 (95%, CI:2.20, 4.67), and Anaesth vs OBGYN of 6.93 (95%, CI:5.64, 8.21). However, there was no significant difference of awareness scores between all participants at postassessment scores.
CONCLUSION: The overall level of awareness was poor. However, the implementation of an education session significantly improved the knowledge and awareness across all disciplines.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study on 140 hypertensive patients attending outpatient follow-up in two primary care clinics in Sungai Buloh, Malaysia, using a convenient sampling method. SUA levels were measured and divided into four quartiles. Two radiologist specialists performed B mode ultrasonography to assess the thickness of the right and left carotid intima media in all participants.
RESULTS: Participants' mean SUA level was 355.75 ± 0.13. Their mean age was 53.44 (± 9.90), with a blood pressure control of 137.09 ± 13.22/81.89 ± 8.95. Elevated CIMT taken at ≥75th percentile was 0.666 for the left and 0.633 for the right common carotid arteries. By using a hierarchical method of multiple logistic regression, compared with the first quartile of the SUA level as reference group, the odd of elevated CIMT in quartile 4 in the common carotid artery was (OR = 2.00; 95% CI = 0.64-6.27, P = .576) for the right and (OR = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.20-2.00, P = .594) for the left. Waist circumference (P = .001), body mass index (P = .013), triglycerides (P
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search was carried out in PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases for (nested) case-control studies that reported the levels of IGF-1 and IGFBP in GC cases and healthy controls, from inception until October 2020. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for estimating combined effect size. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify the source of heterogeneity among studies.
RESULTS: We found eight and five eligible studies (with 1541 participants) which provided data for IGF-1 and IGFBP, respectively. All studies on IGFBP reported the IGFBP-3 isoform. The pooled results indicate that GC patients had significantly lower serum IGF-1 [WMD = -26.21 ng/mL (95% CI, -45.58 to -6.85; P = .008)] and IGFBP-3 [WMD = -0.41 ng/mL (95% CI, -0.80 to -0.01; P = .04; I2 = 89.9%; P
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature regarding the knowledge, attitudes and practice of community pharmacists in managing oral healthcare problems.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted through Scopus, PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Studies regarding knowledge, attitudes and practice of management of dental care by community pharmacists between 1990 and 2019 were included.
RESULTS: Forest plot was performed to access knowledge, attitudes and practice of community pharmacist on oral healthcare. The results showed there were 44% of community pharmacists have a lack of knowledge on oral healthcare to provide an appropriate recommendation to patients with dental problems. Eighty-eight per cent of community pharmacists were willing to improve their knowledge of oral healthcare. There were 86% of them recognised that their role was significant in oral health. However, there were 59% of community pharmacists who had poor attitude in providing oral health information.
CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacists were lacking knowledge on oral health mainly because of paucity in providing appropriate training courses. This has led to poor practices towards oral healthcare as they were unable to provide suitable products recommendations to the patients. This has led the community pharmacists into lack of attitudes in providing oral health information. However, most of the community pharmacists were conscious of their role in the oral healthcare system and were willing to improve their knowledge of oral healthcare.