Preventive and control measures implemented by many countries to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 may negatively impact medication and chronic disease management, which can interfere with achieving patients' therapeutic goals. This study aims to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 lockdown on these aspects, while exploring the role of community pharmacists. A cross-sectional study was conducted via a web-based questionnaire that targeted individuals who suffer from chronic diseases in Jordan. Participants were recruited by convenience sampling and were asked to self-report their ability to access medication, and the perceived role of community pharmacists. Among the 431 participants, the mean age ± SD (years) was 53.8 ± 13.7 and 60.1% (n= 259) were females. Participants mainly reported difficulties in accessing medication (n=198, 45.9%), reduced supplies or unavailability of medications (n=213, 49.4%), nonadherence to medications due to lack of access (n=98, 22.7%) and high costs (n=85, 19.7%). Participants avoided follow-ups due to a fear of infection (n=367, 82.5%) or prolonged waiting time in clinics (n=322, 74.7%). An increased reliance on the community pharmacy for medical advice was reported by 39.9% (n=172) of the participants, with half of them (n=217, 50.3%) depending on the pharmacists for advice regarding over-the-counter medications and COVID-19-related information (n=119, 27.6%). There is an urgent need to involve community pharmacists in medication and chronic disease management with a focus on patient adherence to ensure the optimal management of such vulnerable patient groups. Future studies to assess the effect of pharmacists' contributions towards enhancing medication/disease management are warranted.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging contagious infectious disease. It is pandemic and has affected more than 21 million people and resulted in more than 750,000 deaths worldwide (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries; 14/08/20). Our research group initiated a study to ascertain the knowledge, attitude and practices (KAP) of Jordanians toward COVID-19 prior to any initial case report in Jordan. This project was underway when the first Jordanian case was reported. We extended our study to identify how case reporting would alter public KAP towards COVID-19. This cross-sectional study randomly selected and recruited 2104 Jordanian adults. A four-section questionnaire was devised to address the sociodemographic characteristics of the subjects and their KAP toward COVID-19. The mean knowledge score for the study population was 15.9 ± 2.2 (out of the 20 knowledge questions), with 60.9% of the participants having good knowledge about COVID-19. Participants' practices to prevent transmission of COVID-19 were adequate in more than 60% of participants. Most participants had positive attitudes regarding their role in preventing COVID-19 and many of the participants' attitudes and practices changed to more appropriate ones after reporting the first case of COVID-19 in Jordan. The percentage of participants who trust the government in confronting COVID-19 increased significantly (p value < 0.001). However, one alarming and unexpected finding was that the prevention practice score of participants working in the medical field was similar to those from the general population. This may necessitate stricter training and guidelines for this group who will be in the frontline in combating the disease. Impact of this study: The data generated from this study shows that when cases of disease were reported, the public's attitudes and practices improved in many aspects, and that confidence in the government to contain the disease was boosted. We believe that this study is important in allowing other, international governments to develop an understanding of public KAP during pandemic disease outbreaks.

Background: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) with MitraClip improves outcomes among select patients with moderate-to-severe and severe mitral regurgitation; however, data regarding sex-specific differences in the outcomes among patients undergoing TEER are limited.Methods: An electronic search of the PubMed, Embase, Central, and Web of Science databases for studies comparing sex differences in outcomes among patients undergoing TEER was performed. Summary estimates were primarily conducted using a random-effects model. Results:Eleven studies with a total of 24,905 patients (45.6% women) were included. Women were older and had a lower prevalence of comorbidities, including diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and coronary artery disease. There was no difference in procedural success (odds ratio [OR]: 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.05) and short-term mortality (i.e., up to 30 days) between women and men

Background: In hospital surgical wards, patients are at higher risk for medication errors, in part because physicians may not consider themselves sufficiently trained to prescribe medications. Hence, collaborative teamwork involving the pharmacist is needed. Objectives: To assess the impact of medication reconciliation directed by pharmacists on decreasing medication discrepancies after discharge from the surgical ward. Methods: Patients admitted to the surgical unit at a tertiary teaching hospital in Amman, Jordan, between July 2017 and July 2018 were selected and randomly assigned to either the control or the intervention group. Upon admission, the number and kinds of unintentional medication discrepancies were determined for both groups. Medication reconciliation was then provided to patients in the intervention group. The number of unintentional discrepancies was re-evaluated upon discharge for both groups. To assess differences between the control and intervention groups, the χ2 or Fisher exact test was used for categorical variables and an independent-sample t test for continuous data. A paired t test was conducted to determine whether the number of medication discrepancies was reduced as a result of pharmacists’ recommendations. Results: A total of 123 patients met the inclusion criteria, 61 in the intervention group and 62 in the control group. Discrepancies of omission and wrong dose constituted 41 (77%) of the 53 discrepancies in the intervention group and 25 (76%) of the 33 discrepancies in the control group. The number of unintentional discrepancies was significantly reduced from admission to discharge in both the intervention group (p = 0.002) and the control group (p = 0.007). Of 53 recommendations made by pharmacists, 20 (38%) were accepted by the treating physician, and all of these discrepancies were resolved. Conclusions: This study sheds light on the existence of unintentional medication discrepancies upon admission for surgical patients, which may expose the patients to potential harm upon discharge from hospital. Additional studies with a larger sample size are needed to gain further insights on pharmacists’ role in implementing medication reconciliation for surgical patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03928106 RÉSUMÉ Contexte : Dans les services chirurgicaux des hôpitaux, les patients sont exposés à un risque d’erreurs de médication plus élevé, en partie parce que les médecins ne se considèrent pas suffisamment formés pour prescrire des médicaments. Par conséquent, un travail d’équipe collaboratif impliquant le pharmacien est nécessaire. Objectifs : Évaluer l’impact du bilan comparatif des médicaments dirigé par les pharmaciens sur la diminution des écarts médicamenteux après la sortie du service de chirurgie. Méthodes : Les patients admis à l’unité chirurgicale d’un hôpital d’enseignement tertiaire à Amman, en Jordanie, entre juillet 2017 et juillet 2018 ont été sélectionnés et affectés au hasard au groupe témoin ou au groupe d’intervention. Lors de l’admission, le nombre et les types de divergences médicamenteuses non intentionnelles ont été définis pour les deux groupes. Le bilan comparatif des médicaments a ensuite été fourni aux patients du groupe d’intervention. Le nombre d’écarts non intentionnels a été réévalué à la sortie pour les deux groupes. Pour évaluer les différences entre le groupe témoin et le groupe d’intervention, le test χ2 ou le test exact de Fisher a été utilisé pour les variables catégorielles et un test t pour échantillon indépendant, pour les données continues. Un test t apparié a été effectué pour déterminer si le nombre d’écarts de médicaments a été réduit à la suite des recommandations des pharmaciens. Résultats : Au total, 123 patients répondaient aux critères d’inclusion : 61 dans le groupe d’intervention et 62 dans le groupe témoin. Les divergences d’omission et de mauvaise dose constituaient 41 (77 %) des 53 divergences dans le groupe d’intervention et 25 (76 %) des 33 divergences dans le groupe témoin. Le nombre d’écarts non intentionnels a été significativement réduit de l’admission à la sortie à la fois dans le groupe d’intervention (p = 0,002) et dans le groupe témoin (p = 0,007). Sur 53 recommandations émises par des pharmaciens, 20 (38 %) ont été acceptées par le médecin traitant et toutes ces divergences ont été résolues. Conclusions : Cette étude met en lumière l’existence d’écarts médicamenteux non intentionnels lors de l’admission des patients chirurgicaux, ce qui peut exposer les patients à des risques au moment de leur sortie de l’hôpital. D’autres études avec un échantillon plus important sont nécessaires pour mieux comprendre le rôle des pharmaciens dans la mise en oeuvre du bilan comparatif des médicaments pour les patients chirurgicaux. Enregistrement de l’essai : ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03928106

No abstract