No abstract

No abstract

Objective. To determine how US and Canadian pharmacy schools include content related to health disparities and cultural competence and health literacy in curriculum as well as to review assessment practices. Methods. A cross-sectional survey was distributed to 143 accredited and candidate-status pharmacy programs in the United States and 10 in Canada in three phases. Statistical analysis was performed to assess inter-institutional variability and relationships between institutional characteristics and survey results. Results. After stratification by institutional characteristics, no significant differences were found between the 72 (50%) responding institutions in the United States and the eight (80%) in Canada. A core group of faculty typically taught health disparities and cultural competence content and/or health literacy. Health disparities and cultural competence was primarily taught in multiple courses across multiple years in the pre-APPE curriculum. While health literacy was primarily taught in multiple courses in one year in the pre-APPE curriculum in Canada (75.0%), delivery of health literacy was more varied in the United States, including in a single course (20.0%), multiple courses in one year (17.1%), and multiple courses in multiple years (48.6%). Health disparities and cultural competence and health literacy was mostly taught at the introduction or reinforcement level. Active-learning approaches were mostly used in the United States, whereas in Canada active learning was more frequently used in teaching health literacy (62.5%) than health disparities and cultural competence (37.5%). Few institutions reported providing professional preceptor development. Conclusion.The majority of responding pharmacy schools in the United States and Canada include

Though offering potential advantages over warfarin, the use of rivaroxaban should be monitored to increase appropriateness of therapy and improve patient safety. Therapeutic interchanges, pharmacist-directed interventions and other initiatives can be implemented to ensure appropriate use.

Objective. To determine factors predictive of student failure or poor performance on advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs) at a single pharmacy program. Methods. This retrospective cohort evaluated students entering the Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) program from 2012-2014 at St. Louis College of Pharmacy. Students who received a grade of F for one or more APPEs (failure group) were compared to all other students (non-failure group). A secondary evaluation compared students with a C or F on one or more APPEs (poor performers) to all other students (non-poor performers). Data were collected on didactic and experiential performance, identifiable professionalism issues from introductory pharmacy practice experiences (IPPEs), and academic honor code violations. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were performed to determine factors associated with APPE failure and poor performance. Results. A total of 669 students were analyzed. Twenty-eight students (4.2%) failed one or more APPEs and 81 students (12.1%) were identified as poor performers (grade of C or F). For the primary outcome, professional grade point average (GPA) of less than 2.7, practicum failure, IPPE professionalism issue(s), and pharmacotherapy course failure were identified for inclusion in the multivariable analysis. The IPPE professionalism issue(s) (HR 4.8 [95% CI 1.9-12.4]) and pharmacotherapy course failure (HR 4.2 [95% CI, 1.6-11.1]) were associated with APPE failure on multivariable regression. On the secondary analysis, the same variables were identified for multivariable regression, with professional GPA of less than 2.7 (HR 2.7 [95% CI 1.5-5]), IPPE professionalism issue(s) (HR 3.9 [95% CI 2.2-6.9]), and pharmacotherapy course failure (HR 2.0 [95% CI 1.1-3.7]) associated with poor performance. Conclusion.Poor academic performance and/or identified unprofessional behavior while completing IPPEs are associated with APPE failure and poor performance. Interventions should be aimed at identifying at-risk students and addressing risk factors prior to APPEs.

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan has been incorporated into guidelines based on the results of the PARADIGM-HF trial, which demonstrated reduced mortality in stable patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sacubitril/valsartan is recommended in addition to other HF therapies in place of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin-receptor-blocker. Objectives: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan initiation in a community hospital. Design/methods: This single-center, retrospective review evaluated patients that received ≥24 hours of sacubitril/valsartan therapy August 2015-March 2018. The primary outcome included the incidence of hypotensive events during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included: incidence of inpatient acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyperkalemia, rates of inpatient discontinuation, and change in ejection fraction (EF) ≥30 days after initiation. Results: Of the 59 patients included, 21 (35.6%) experienced a hypotensive event. A total of 6 patients (10.2%) discontinued therapy while inpatient, which was more likely in patients that developed AKI (n = 3; p = 0.005) or those who experienced a hypotensive event (n = 5; p = 0.018). There was a significant difference in mean EF from baseline to ≥ 30 days postinitiation (24.8% vs. 33.2%; p = 0.018). Conclusion: Careful patient selection and monitoring for hypotension, AKI, and hyperkalemia can help increase successful outcomes and improve patient safety.

No abstract

Based on the results of this study, morbidly obese patients may require higher TWD to obtain and maintain a therapeutic INR.