OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-provided discharge counseling on mortality rate, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and medication adherence at 30 days post discharge.METHODS:This randomized controlled trial was approved by the local ethics committee and included patients aged 18 years or older admitted to the cardiology ward of a Brazilian tertiary hospital. The intervention group received a pharmacist-led medication counseling session at discharge and a telephone follow-up three and 15 days after discharge. The outcomes included the number of deaths, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and medication adherence. All outcomes were evaluated during a pharmacist-led ambulatory consultation performed 30 days after discharge.RESULTS:Of 133 patients, 104 were included in the analysis (51 and 53 in the intervention and control groups, respectively). The intervention group had a lower overall readmission rate, number of emergency department visits, and mortality rate, but the differences were not statistically significant (p>0.05). However, the intervention group had a significantly lower readmission rate related to heart disease (0% vs. 11.3%, p=0.027), despite the small sample size. Furthermore, medication counseling contributed significantly to improved medication adherence according to three different tools (p<0.05).CONCLUSIONS:Pharmacist-provided discharge medication counseling resulted in better medication adherence scores and a lower incidence of cardiovascular-associated hospital readmissions, thus representing a useful service for cardiology patients.

High-quality evidence shows that alemtuzumab, natalizumab and ocrelizumab present the highest efficacy among DMTs, and other meta-analyses are required regarding adverse events frequency, to better understand the safety of therapies. Based on efficacy profile, guidelines should consider a three-category classification (i.e. high, intermediate and low efficacy).

No abstract

Mapping the components of the pharmacist-led discharge counselling studies through a scoping review allowed us to reveal how this service is performed around the world. Wide variability in this process and poor reporting were identified. Future studies are needed to define the core outcome set of this clinical pharmacy service to allow the generation of robust evidence and reproducibility in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Transitions of care can contribute to medication errors and other adverse drug events. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led discharge counseling on hospital readmission and emergency department visits through a systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, and DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), along with a manual search (July 2017). PROSPERO registration no. CRD42017068444. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers performed all the steps of the systematic review process (screening of titles and abstracts, full-text appraisal, data extraction, and quality assessment), with contributions from a third researcher. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting data on pharmacist-led discharge counseling. DATA EXTRACTION: Primary extracted outcomes were emergency department visits and hospital readmission rates. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analyses of intervention versus usual care for hospital readmission and emergency department visit rates were performed using the inverse variance method. Results are reported as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Prediction intervals (PIs) were also calculated. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. A total of 21 RCTs were included in the qualitative synthesis and 18 in the meta-analyses (n = 7,244 patients). The original meta-analysis revealed a significant difference in the impact between pharmacist-led discharge counseling and usual care on overall hospital readmission (RR = 0.864 [95% CI 0.763-0.997], P = .020) and emergency department (RR = 0.697 [95% CI 0.535-0.907], P = .007) visits. However, the small number of included studies, the high heterogeneity among trials (I2 between 40% and 60%), and the wide PIs (hospital readmission: PI 0.542-1.186; emergency department visits: PI 0.027-1.367) prevented drawing further conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Insufficient evidence exists regarding the effect of pharmacist-led discharge counseling on hospital readmission and emergency department visits. Further well-designed clinical trials with defined core outcome sets are needed.

Objective:The purpose of this overview (systematic review of systematic reviews) is to evaluate the impact of clinical decision support systems (CDSS) applied to medication use in the care process.Methods:A search for systematic reviews that address CDSS was performed on Medline following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane recommendations. Terms related to CDSS and systematic reviews were used in combination with Boolean operators and search field tags to build the electronic search strategy. There was no limitation of date or language for inclusion. We included revisions that investigated, as a main or secondary objective, changes in process outcomes. The Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) score was used to evaluate the quality of the studies.Results:The search retrieved 954 articles. Five articles were added through manual search, totaling an initial sample of 959 articles. After screening and reading in full, 44 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria. In the medication-use processes where CDSS was used, the most common stages were prescribing (n=38 (86.36%) and administering (n=12 (27.27%)). Most of the systematic reviews demonstrated improvement in the health care process (30/44 – 68.2%). The main positive results were related to improvement of the quality of prescription by the physicians (14/30 – 46.6%) and reduction of errors in prescribing (5/30 - 16.6%). However, the quality of the studies was poor, according to the score used.Conclusion:CDSSs represent a promising technology to optimize the medication-use process, especially related to improvement in the quality of prescriptions and reduction of prescribing errors, although higher quality studies are needed to establish the predictors of success in these systems.

Objetivo: mapear os possíveis desfechos de longo prazo da COVID-19 no mundo. Métodos: em acordo com as recomendações do Joanna Briggs Institute, foi realizada uma revisão sistemática de escopo de estudos experimentais e observacionais com busca nas bases de dados PubMed e Scopus, complementada por busca manual. Resultados: de 5.325 registros, 121 atenderam aos critérios de elegibilidade, os quais incluíram 1.638 recuperados da COVID-19. Foram identificados 52 potenciais desfechos de longo prazo da COVID-19, principalmente disfunção olfatória (n=605), disfunção gustativa (n=372), dispneia (n=233) e lesões pulmonares (n=225). Entre os cuidados de longo prazo, destacam-se início de terapia medicamentosa, terapia de substituição renal e amputação. Conclusão: foram mapeados 52 possíveis desfechos de longo prazo da COVID-19 e recomendações de continuação de cuidados, que variaram de manifestações leves a graves com duração menor ou igual a um mês e maior que um mês.

No abstract