Objective: The use and sales of herbal medications have increased dramatically over the past several years. Pharmacists are in an ideal position to educate patients about herbal medicines. This study was intended to determine the knowledge and attitudes of pharmacists regarding herbal medications. Methods: A survey was distributed to pharmacists at several state and regional meetings in Virginia and North Carolina between August and October 1998. The survey evaluated demographic data, attitudinal scales, and a 15-item herbal medicine knowledge test. Pharmacists immediately returned the surveys to the distributor on completion. Results: Of the 217 surveys distributed. 164 met the Inclusion criteria for further evaluation. Of the pharmacists surveyed, 68.0% practiced in a community pharmacy, 45.1% had previous continuing education on herbal medications, and 73.6% sold herbal medications in their practice settings. The average score on the herbal knowledge test was 6.3 (maximum score of 15). Pharmacists with previous continuing education scored significantly higher than those without prior continuing education (p < 0.001). Of the 15 questions, the five that pharmacists were most likely to answer correctly assessed the uses of herbal medications. Additionally, pharmacists with prior continuing education or with access to herbal medication information at their practice site were more likely to agree that providing information about herbal medication is a pharmacist's professional responsibility (p = 0.02 and p = 0.01, respectively). Conclusions: The findings from this study demonstrate that pharmacists were more likely to answer correctly about the uses of herbal medications than about drug interactions, adverse drug effects, and precautions of herbal medications. Additionally, pharmacists with previous continuing education on herbal medications were more knowledgeable about these products. With the increasing use of herbal medications, there is a greater need for pharmacy training programs in this area.
The findings from this study demonstrate that pharmacists were more likely to answer correctly about the uses of herbal medications than about drug interactions, adverse drug effects, and precautions of herbal medications. Additionally, pharmacists with previous continuing education on herbal medications were more knowledgeable about these products. With the increasing use of herbal medications, there is a greater need for pharmacy training programs in this area.
Intranasal corticosteroids are accepted as safe and effective first-line therapy for allergic rhinitis. Several intranasal corticosteroids are available: beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone propionate, mometasone furoate, and triamcinolone acetonide. All are efficacious in treating seasonal allergic rhinitis and as prophylaxis for perennial allergic rhinitis. In general, they relieve nasal congestion and itching, rhinorrhea, and sneezing that occur in the early and late phases of allergic response, with studies showing almost complete prevention of late-phase symptoms. The rationale for topical intranasal corticosteroids in the treatment of allergic rhinitis is that adequate drug concentrations can be achieved at receptor sites in the nasal mucosa. This leads to symptom control and reduces the risk of systemic adverse effects. Adverse reactions usually are limited to the nasal mucosa, such as dryness, burning and stinging, and sneezing, together with headache and epistaxis in 5-10% of patients regardless of formulation or compound. Differences among agents are limited to potency, patient preference, dosing regimens, and delivery, device and vehicle.
Weekly treatment with low-dose oral methotrexate (MTX) was compared with daily auranofin (AUR) treatment in a 36-week double-blind, randomized, multicenter study of 281 patients with active, adult-onset rheumatoid arthritis. Both treatment groups showed significant improvement by the usual measures of clinical efficacy. The response with MTX occurred earlier and was consistently greater than that with AUR. An intent-to-treat analysis showed significantly greater improvement (P < 0.01) with MTX for painful and swollen joint counts and physician and patient global assessments of disease activity. Adverse reactions were reported more frequently in the AUR group, and more AUR-treated patients were withdrawn from the study because of toxicity. MTX was thus more effective and better tolerated than AUR in this study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.