No abstract

No abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to provide a scoping review of the impact of pharmacist-led interventions on medication adherence and clinical outcomes in patients with hypertension and hyperlipidemia. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using pre-defined search terms in three scientific databases, including Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and PubMed. A multi-stage screening process that considered relevancy, publication year (2009-2019), English language, and article type (original research) was followed. Review articles, meta-analysis studies, and conference proceedings were excluded. Data charting was done in an iterative process using a study-specific extraction form. Results: Of the initially identified 681 studies, 17 studies with 136,026 patients were included in the review. Of these, 16 were randomized controlled trials, while the remaining study was a retrospective cohort study. The majority of pharmacist-led interventions were face-to-face counseling sessions (n=8), followed by remote-or telephone-based interventions (n=5) and multi-faceted interventions (n=4). The majority of the studies (n=7) used selfreported adherence measures and pharmacy refill records (n=8) to measure the rate of adherence to prescribed medications. Eleven of the included studies reported a statistically significant (P<0.05) impact on medication adherence. Overall, twelve studies assessed the effect of the interventions on the clinical outcome measures; of these, only four studies were associated with significant impact. Conclusion: Pharmacist-led interventions were associated with improved patients' adherence to their medications but were less likely to be consistently associated with the attainment of clinical outcomes. Face-to-face counseling was the most commonly used intervention; while, the multi-faceted interventions were more likely to be effective in improving the overall outcome measures. The rigorous design of targeted interventions with more frequent follow-ups, careful consideration of the involved medications, and patients' characteristics could increase the effectiveness of these interventions.

To compare the effectiveness and safety of aerosolized (AER) plus intravenous (IV) colistin with IV colistin alone in patients with nosocomial pneumonia (NP) due to multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gramnegative bacteria. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of adults with NP who received IV colistin alone or in combination with AER colistin. The primary endpoint was clinical cure at end of therapy. Secondary endpoints included microbiological eradication, in-hospital mortality and nephrotoxicity. Results: In total, 135 patients were included in this study: 65 patients received AER plus IV colistin and 70 patients received IV colistin alone. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Clinical cure was achieved in 42 (65%) patients who received AER plus IV colistin and 26 (37%) patients who received IV colistin alone (P = 0.01). Among a total of 88 patients who were microbiologically evaluable, 27 (42%) patients who received AER plus IV colistin and 12 (17%) patients who received IV colistin alone attained favourable microbiological outcomes (P = 0.022). In-hospital mortality (43% vs 59%, P = 0.072) was higher in patients who received IV colistin alone, but the difference was not significant. Renal injury occurred in 31% of patients who received AER plus IV colistin and in 41% of patients who received IV colistin alone (P = 0.198). Conclusion: AER colistin can be considered as salvage therapy as an adjunct to IV administration for the treatment of patients with NP due to MDR Gram-negative pathogens.

Key PointsQuestionWhat is the risk of serious infections, opportunistic infections, and cancer in patients with rheumatologic diseases treated with interleukin inhibitors?FindingsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis of 74 randomized clinical trials comprising 29 214 patients, pooled results suggest that risk of serious infections, opportunistic infections, and cancer is increased in patients with rheumatologic diseases who are treated with interleukin inhibitors compared with placebo.MeaningThis analysis suggests estimates of risk for infections and cancer associated with the use of interleukin inhibitors that can inform shared decision-making when patients and clinicians are contemplating the use of interleukin inhibitors for rheumatologic diseases.

Background The aim of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) to colistin-based regimen in the treatment of infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE). Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study of inpatients who received either CAZ-AVI or intravenous colistin for treatment of infections due to CRE. The study was conducted in 5 tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Main study outcomes included in-hospital mortality, clinical cure at end of treatment, and acute kidney injury (AKI). Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression model were conducted to assess the independent impact of CAZ-AVI on the clinical outcome. Results A total of 230 patients were included in this study: 149 patients received CAZ-AVI and 81 patients received colistin-based regimen. Clinical cure (71% vs 52%; P = 0.004; OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.31–4.01) was significantly more common in patients who received CAZ-AVI. After adjusting the difference between the two groups, treatment with CAZ-AVI is independently associated with clinical cure (adjusted OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.28–5.91). In-hospital mortality (35% vs 44%; P = 0.156; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.39–1.16) was lower in patients who received CAZ-AVI but the difference was not significant. AKI (15% vs 33%; P = 0.002; OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19–0.69) was significantly less common in patients who received CAZ-AVI. Conclusion CAZ-AVI is associated with higher rate of clinical cure and lower rate of AKI compared to colistin. Our findings support the preferential use of CAZ-AVI over colistin-based regimen for treating these infections.

Background: Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is an endocrine disorder affecting about 10% of women in reproductive age and associated with a variety of hormonal abnormalities, including hyperandrogenemia and infertility, all of which could lead to PCOS. Statins were previously introduced as a therapeutic option for reducing testosterone levels in women with PCOS, either alone or in combination. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of different statins alone or in combination with metformin in reducing testosterone levels in women with PCOS. Methods: Medline, Embase, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for studies that investigated the efficacy of statins, metformin, spironolactone, or combined oral contraceptives (COCs), individually or in combination, in reducing the testosterone level in patients with PCOS. The search was limited to randomized clinical trials and conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses-extension statement for network meta-analyses (PRISMA-NMA). The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias (RoB) assessment tool. A frequentist network meta-analysis using random-effects models was used to assess the efficacy in reducing testosterone level and were expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible interval (95%Crl). All statistical analyses were performed using netmeta Version 1.0 on R statistical package.

Introduction: The ambulatory care pharmacy practice in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is a fairly new but evolving specialty that has provided patient‐centered care in various clinics over the past 20 years. It mainly resembles the United States in its structure and provides its services to patients mostly free of charge. The Saudi Vision 2030 and the new transformation in its health care system present many opportunities for ambulatory care clinical pharmacists with some expected challenges. Method: This is a review written by a group of experts under the Saudi Society of Clinical Pharmacy umbrella propose a definition and comprehensively review the history of ambulatory care pharmacy practice in KSA, the currently available services, potential future opportunities, and expected challenges. Results: The expert's insight would support the ambulatory care pharmacy practice in KSA, evaluate the need to expand its services, define its role, and suggest set requirements for pharmacists to be eligible to provide ambulatory care pharmacy services. Conclusion: The position statement recommendations may help legislative bodies provide a more explicit explanation of ambulatory care pharmacy services in KSA to build a more robust base structure for such services.