A technical assistance program approach for pharmacist clinical services integration in primary care organizations.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the use of technical assistance (TA) programs to facilitate the integration of pharmacist clinical services in primary care settings. OBJECTIVE: Design, implement, and evaluate a TA program to advance pharmacist integration and clinical services in primary care. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Structured TA program for developing new or enhancing current integrated pharmacist services was utilized in 4 primary care organizations (i.e., federally qualified health center, accountable care organization, and an academic and regional health system). PRACTICE INNOVATION: Holistic TA program with a logic model, organizational stages of pharmacist integration, project prioritization, and implementation plans. EVALUATION METHODS: A mixed-methods contextual inquiry approach for integration of pharmacist clinical services. Quantitative analysis was used for TA program activities, time spent, pilot project data, and a web-based survey for post-TA program assessment. Coincidence analysis was used to assess organizational commitment to TA services. Qualitative analysis was used for data collected through semi-structured key informant interviews and team meeting activity reports. RESULTS: TA program team spent 1872 hours over 11 months on program development, logistics, implementation, and project oversight. TA services included 88 onsite and virtual meetings, 11 onsite pharmacist coaching sessions, 6 workflow mapping sessions, and updating online learning resources. Primary care organizations that had already hired a pharmacist were more likely to uptake TA services. Most useful TA methods were webinar meetings (89%) and on-site pharmacist coaching (88%). TA project results were used for strategic planning (73%), pharmacist value/impact assessment (72%), pharmacist capacity modeling (68%), and workflow design (65%). A key learning from the TA program was the importance of a qualified pharmacist with clinical service experience in primary care settings and population health teams. CONCLUSION: TA program for the pharmacist clinical service integration has broad application to primary care organizations with diverse organizational structures, payer mixes, and practice settings.

Budesonide/Glycopyrrolate/Formoterol Fumarate Co-suspension Metered Dose Inhaler: A Triple Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

OBJECTIVE: To review current evidence on the use of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of budesonide/glycopyrrolate/formoterol fumarate (BGFF) triple therapy delivered via metered dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and offer clinical practice insights. DATA SOURCES: We used PubMed to conduct the literature search from 1946 through June 30, 2021, using budesonide, glycopyrrolate or glycopyrronium, and formoterol. STUDY SELECTION AND EXTRACTION: We included clinical trials in patients with COPD along with pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: In all, 19 citations were included. BGFF MDI reduces the risk of exacerbations regardless of exacerbation history compared with dual bronchodilators or inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß-agonist. Rescue inhaler use decreased, and patient-reported outcomes of symptoms and well-being improved with triple therapy. Mortality was decreased with the higher-dose BGFF MDI in comparison to dual bronchodilator therapy. Dysphonia and candidiasis were more common with BGFF MDI compared with dual bronchodilators, as was pneumonia. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: BGFF MDI is the second FDC triple therapy approved for COPD treatment. BGFF MDI improves important patient outcomes in COPD, including exacerbation risk. The unique co-suspension technology allows delivery of 3 active ingredients in 1 inhaler, a potential benefit to overcome adherence and technique-related barriers. These benefits must be gently weighed against the increased risk of pneumonia. CONCLUSION: The findings from phase 3 trials support the efficacy and safety of triple therapy in COPD. Future studies are needed to confirm potential mortality benefit and the role of triple therapy in patients without an exacerbation history.

Factors influencing primary care organization commitment to technical assistance for pharmacist clinical services integration.

BACKGROUND: While technical assistance (TA) has been utilized by primary care organizations (PCOs) for electronic health record installation and medical home recognition, little is known about PCOs' use of TA to optimize pharmacist clinical services and integration in team-based care or population health programs. In 2019, the Connecticut Office of Health Strategy's State Innovation Model Program funded a no-cost TA initiative for 9 PCOs to initiate and/or advance pharmacist clinical services. OBJECTIVE: To assess organizational, operational, and pharmacist factors that influenced PCO commitment to the TA program. METHODS: During the TA program, data were collected from multiple sources including PCO demographic data; discussions and meetings with PCO medical, pharmacy, and administrative leaders; on-site workflow observations; and pharmacist coaching sessions. Configurational comparative methods were applied using the data collected during the TA program. Candidate factors were identified and calibrated on the basis of the researchers' knowledge of the TA program, organizational readiness for change models, implementation science frameworks, and published literature. Each candidate factor was iteratively assessed until 13 factors were selected and calibrated by independently assigning each factor a dichotomous value across PCOs. Calibration differences between the researchers were discussed until consensus was reached. Solutions were modeled using the Coincidence Analysis (cna) package in R and RStudio (RStudio, PBC). RESULTS: Of the 9 PCOs, 4 committed to participating in the TA program. Only 1 factor, the presence of a hired pharmacist, consistently distinguished PCOs that committed from those that did not, with 100% coverage and 80% consistency. CONCLUSION: PCO commitment to participate in the TA program was best explained by the factor of already having hired a pharmacist. These results can inform future efforts to engage PCOs in TA, primary care policy initiatives, and future research to understand factors influencing PCO success with pharmacist clinical services integration.

Innovative partnership in Connecticut to expand health professional eligibility to administer COVID-19 vaccines.

BACKGROUND: On December 7, 2020, the Acting Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) issued an order authorizing eligible health professionals to administer coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines provided they complete a vaccination training program. The University of Connecticut (UConn) School of Pharmacy was approached to collaborate with DPH to create a certification program to meet the needs of this order. OBJECTIVES: To use a unique, pharmacist-led practice model to increase the number of competent vaccinators to administer the COVID-19 vaccine and to reduce vaccine hesitancy with timely vaccine information. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: A didactic and in-person training program was developed, with an evaluation completed by a vaccination-certified pharmacist. In addition, faculty members, staff, and students developed short videos answering questions about COVID-19 vaccines. PRACTICE INNOVATION: We are aware of no other such programs using pharmacists and student pharmacists as primary creators of training and certification of health professionals to administer the COVID-19 vaccine. EVALUATION METHODS: Success was gauged by the rapid increase in the number of eligible health professionals who completed the developed training program and became certified as COVID-19 vaccinators. When addressing vaccine hesitancy, success was defined by the number of videos created and the number of views and likes the videos received. RESULTS: As of April 30, 2021, 1834 health professionals registered to administer the COVID-19 vaccine. A total of 1195 (65%) participants completed the online training developed by pharmacists, and 872 participants (48%) attended pharmacist-led, in-person competencies. As of July 29, 2021, efforts resulted in 14,972 views and 257 "Likes" for 79 videos promoted through social media platforms. CONCLUSION: A partnership between the Connecticut DPH and the UConn School of Pharmacy allowed the rapid increase in capacity to administer the COVID-19 vaccine to citizens of Connecticut. Patients are receptive to accessing health information that pharmacists create on social media.

Myth Busters: Dietary Supplements and COVID-19.

News and social media platforms have implicated dietary supplements in the treatment and prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). During this pandemic when information quickly evolves in the presence of contradicting messages and misinformation, the role of the pharmacist is essential. Here, we review theoretical mechanisms and evidence related to efficacy and safety of select supplements in the setting of COVID-19, including vitamin C, vitamin D, zinc, elderberry, and silver. Evidence evaluating these supplements in COVID-19 patients is lacking, and providers and patients should not rely on dietary supplements to prevent or treat COVID-19. Rather, reference to evidence-based guidelines should guide treatment decisions.

Comparative Effectiveness of Analgesics to Reduce Acute Pain in the Prehospital Setting.

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to assess comparative effectiveness and harms of opioid and nonopioid analgesics for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain in the prehospital setting. Methods: We searched MEDLINE®, Embase®, and Cochrane Central from the earliest date through May 9, 2019. Two investigators screened abstracts, reviewed full-text files, abstracted data, and assessed study level risk of bias. We performed meta-analyses when appropriate. Conclusions were made with consideration of established clinically important differences and we graded each conclusion's strength of evidence (SOE). Results: We included 52 randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies. Due to the absence or insufficiency of prehospital evidence we based conclusions for initial analgesia on indirect evidence from the emergency department setting. As initial analgesics, there is no evidence of a clinically important difference in the change of pain scores with opioids vs. ketamine administered primarily intravenously (IV) (low SOE), IV acetaminophen (APAP) (low SOE), or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) administered primarily IV (moderate SOE). The combined use of an opioid and ketamine, administered primarily IV, may reduce pain more than an opioid alone at 15 and 30 minutes (low SOE). Opioids may cause fewer adverse events than ketamine (low SOE) when primarily administered intranasally. Opioids cause less dizziness than ketamine (low SOE) but may increase the risk of respiratory depression compared with ketamine (low SOE), primarily administered IV. Opioids cause more dizziness (moderate SOE) and may cause more adverse events than APAP (low SOE), both administered IV, but there is no evidence of a clinically important difference in hypotension (low SOE). Opioids may cause more adverse events and more drowsiness than NSAIDs (low SOE), both administered primarily IV. Conclusions: As initial analgesia, opioids are no different than ketamine, APAP, and NSAIDs in reducing acute pain in the prehospital setting. Opioids may cause fewer total side effects than ketamine, but more than APAP or NSAIDs. Combining an opioid and ketamine may reduce acute pain more than an opioid alone but comparative harms are uncertain. When initial morphine is inadequate, giving ketamine may provide greater and quicker acute pain relief than giving additional morphine, although comparative harms are uncertain. Due to indirectness, strength of evidence is generally low, and future research in the prehospital setting is needed.

Cross-sectional analysis of consumer-facing mHealth apps associated with inhaler monitoring for asthma.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the current landscape of consumer-directed mHealth apps that communicate with inhalers for asthma. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional and systematic analysis of Google Play and the Apple App Stores to identify apps that are consumer-direct and available in English, intended for patients with asthma and communicate with an inhaler-based sensor. We collected information about each app using the app stores and publicly available manufacturer websites. We reported the results descriptively. RESULTS: We identified 6 apps, released as early as 2012. Of these, 5 apps require an external sensor available over the counter to be attached to the patient's inhaler, and 1 app communicates with a prescription-only inhaler that has a built-in sensor and will be dispensed from the pharmacy. Aside from passively monitoring inhaler adherence, all apps facilitate provider communication; serve as a diary; and use notifications, reminders, or alarms for things such as inhaler dose reminders. Additional features vary across apps, including direct pharmacy access for refill requests and telehealth and artificial intelligence to predict future asthma exacerbations. CONCLUSION: We identified 6 consumer-directed mHealth apps that communicate with inhalers for asthma management. Pharmacists must be prepared to evaluate these apps, particularly in comparison with the first prescription-only inhaler built to communicate with an mHealth app to be released this year. To do so, further research on the outcomes and use of these apps is needed so that pharmacists can make evidence-based recommendations.

Association of Inhaled Corticosteroids and Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists With Asthma Control in Patients With Uncontrolled, Persistent Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) are a potential adjunct therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of persistent asthma. Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects associated with LAMA vs placebo or vs other controllers as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids and the use of a LAMA as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß-agonists (LABAs; hereafter referred to as triple therapy) vs inhaled corticosteroids and LABA in patients with uncontrolled, persistent asthma. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and clinical trial registries (earliest date through November 28, 2017). Study Selection: Two reviewers selected randomized clinical trials or observational studies evaluating a LAMA vs placebo or vs another controller as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids or triple therapy vs inhaled corticosteroids and LABA in patients with uncontrolled, persistent asthma reporting on an outcome of interest. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-analyses using a random-effects model was conducted to calculate risk ratios (RRs), risk differences (RDs), and mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% CIs. Citation screening, data abstraction, risk assessment, and strength-of-evidence grading were completed by 2 independent reviewers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Asthma exacerbations. Results: Of 1326 records identified, 15 randomized clinical trials (N = 7122 patients) were included. Most trials assessed adding LAMA vs placebo or LAMA vs LABA to inhaled corticosteroids. Adding LAMA vs placebo to inhaled corticosteroids was associated with a significantly reduced risk of exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.92]; RD, -0.02 [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.00]). Compared with adding LABA, adding LAMA to inhaled corticosteroids was not associated with significant improvements in exacerbation risk (RR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.53 to 1.42]; RD, 0.00 [95% CI, -0.02 to 0.02]), or any other outcomes of interest. Triple therapy was not significantly associated with improved exacerbation risk vs inhaled corticosteroids and LABA (RR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.57 to 1.22]; RD, -0.01 [95% CI, -0.08 to 0.07]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the use of LAMA compared with placebo as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids was associated with a lower risk of asthma exacerbations; however, the association of LAMA with benefit may not be greater than that with LABA. Triple therapy was not associated with a lower risk of exacerbations.

Association of Inhaled Corticosteroids and Long-Acting ß-Agonists as Controller and Quick Relief Therapy With Exacerbations and Symptom Control in Persistent Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Combined use of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting ß-agonists (LABAs) as the controller and the quick relief therapy termed single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) is a potential therapeutic regimen for the management of persistent asthma. Objective: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of SMART in patients with persistent asthma. Data Sources and Study Selection: The databases of MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from database inception through August 2016 and updated through November 28, 2017. Two reviewers selected randomized clinical trials or observational studies evaluating SMART vs inhaled corticosteroids with or without a LABA used as the controller therapy and short-acting ß-agonists as the relief therapy for patients aged 5 years or older with persistent asthma and reporting on an outcome of interest. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs), risk differences (RDs), and mean differences with corresponding 95% CIs. Citation screening, data abstraction, risk assessment, and strength of evidence grading were completed by 2 independent reviewers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Asthma exacerbations. Results: The analyses included 16 randomized clinical trials (N = 22 748 patients), 15 of which evaluated SMART as a combination therapy with budesonide and formoterol in a dry-powder inhaler. Among patients aged 12 years or older (n = 22 524; mean age, 42 years; 14 634 [65%] were female), SMART was associated with a reduced risk of asthma exacerbations compared with the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids and LABA as the controller therapy (RR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.58 to 0.80]; RD, -6.4% [95% CI, -10.2% to -2.6%]) and a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids and LABA as the controller therapy (RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.98]; RD, -2.8% [95% CI, -5.2% to -0.3%]). Similar results were seen when SMART was compared with inhaled corticosteroids alone as the controller therapy. Among patients aged 4 to 11 years (n = 341; median age, 8 [range, 4-11] years; 69 [31%] were female), SMART was associated with a reduced risk of asthma exacerbations compared with a higher dose of inhaled corticosteroids as the controller therapy (RR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.94]; RD, -12.0% [95% CI, -22.5% to -1.5%]) or the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids and LABA as the controller therapy (RR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.23 to 0.63]; RD, -23.2% [95% CI, -33.6% to -12.1%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis of patients with persistent asthma, the use of single maintenance and reliever therapy compared with inhaled corticosteroids as the controller therapy (with or without a long-acting ß-agonist) and short-acting ß-agonists as the relief therapy was associated with a lower risk of asthma exacerbations. Evidence for patients aged 4 to 11 years was limited.

The Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler, a Novel Inhaled Drug Delivery Device.

Summary The Respimat SMI offers a novel delivery mechanism for the management of primarily COPD, but asthma as well. Presently, four different medications, as monotherapy or a combination of two active ingredients, are available using the Respimat SMI technology. Multiple studies have demonstrated safety and efficacy of these drugs when delivered via Respimat SMI. Patients tend to prefer the Respimat SMI over traditional inhaler devices, as it overcomes some of the disadvantages posed by traditional delivery devices.

A Description of Required NAPLEX Preparation Courses Among US Pharmacy Programs.

OBJECTIVE: One of the final tasks for pharmacy graduates to enter practice is passing the North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX). Given the recent national declines in pass rates, programs are making significant investments of time and money in NAPLEX preparation. The objective is to characterize the structure and content of required NAPLEX preparation courses. METHODS: A survey on NAPLEX preparation practices was developed and distributed to all Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education-accredited pharmacy schools. NAPLEX preparation course syllabi were also collected as part of this survey. Syllabus information was summarized into 4 elements: course structure, content, resources, and assessment strategies. RESULTS: Of 144 colleges/schools of pharmacy, 100 responded to the survey, 87 reported having a NAPLEX preparation program, and 47 reported having a NAPLEX preparation course. Twenty syllabi were collected. Most courses (14) were longitudinal through the Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experiences year, 16 were credit-bearing, and 19 included a vendor NAPLEX preparatory product. Fourteen courses were hybrid delivery, and 12 focused on licensure preparation and included test-taking strategies, calculations practice, case-based discussions, etc. All 20 courses reported using unproctored timed quizzes and practice examinations, half conducted proctored timed assessments, and 11 included written reflections and/or continuous professional development activities. Most courses were pass/fail (15), and high stakes (16) were defined by delayed or withheld graduation as a consequence for failure. Only 3 of 20 NAPLEX preparation courses were mapped to NAPLEX competencies. CONCLUSION: Although required NAPLEX preparation courses focus on assessments, the content is infrequently mapped to NAPLEX competencies. This project provides some information on how schools might create their own NAPLEX preparatory courses.

Prolonged versus standard-duration venous thromboprophylaxis in major orthopedic surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery is unclear. PURPOSE: To compare the benefits and harms of prolonged versus standard-duration thromboprophylaxis after major orthopedic surgery in adults. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus from 1980 to July 2011 and MEDLINE from 1980 through November 2011, without language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials reporting thromboembolic or bleeding outcomes that compared prolonged (≥21 days) with standard-duration (7 to 10 days) thromboprophylaxis. DATA ABSTRACTION: Two independent reviewers abstracted data and rated study quality and strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eight randomized, controlled trials (3 good-quality and 5 fair-quality) met the inclusion criteria. High-strength evidence showed that compared with standard-duration therapy, prolonged prophylaxis resulted in fewer cases of pulmonary embolism (PE) (5 trials; odds ratio [OR], 0.14 [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.47]; absolute risk reduction [ARR], 0.8%), asymptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (4 trials; relative risk [RR], 0.48 [CI, 0.31 to 0.75]; ARR, 5.8%), symptomatic DVT (4 trials; OR, 0.36 [CI, 0.16 to 0.81]; ARR, 1.5%), and proximal DVT (6 trials; RR, 0.29 [CI, 0.16 to 0.52]; ARR, 7.1%). Moderate-strength evidence showed fewer symptomatic objectively confirmed episodes of venous thromboembolism (4 trials; RR, 0.38 [CI, 0.19 to 0.77]; ARR, 5.7%), nonfatal PE (4 trials; OR, 0.13 [CI, 0.03 to 0.54]; ARR, 0.7%), and DVT (7 trials; RR, 0.37 [CI, 0.21 to 0.64]; ARR, 12.1%) with prolonged prophylaxis. High-strength evidence showed more minor bleeding events with prolonged prophylaxis (OR, 2.44 [CI, 1.41 to 4.20]; absolute risk increase, 6.3%), and insufficient evidence from 1 trial on hip fracture surgery suggested more surgical-site bleeding events (OR, 7.55 [CI, 1.51 to 37.64]) with prolonged prophylaxis. LIMITATIONS: Data relevant to knee replacement or hip fracture surgery were scant and insufficient. Most trials had few events; the strength of evidence ratings that were used may not adequately capture uncertainty in such situations. CONCLUSION: Prolonged prophylaxis decreases the risk for venous thromboembolism, PE, and DVT while increasing the risk for minor bleeding in patients undergoing total hip replacement.

Determining preceptor perceptions of APPE readiness through the use of entrustable professional activities.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacy programs are required to demonstrate that students are advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) ready, but neither a professionally recognized definition of nor a consistent approach to assess APPE readiness exists. METHODS: APPE preceptors were surveyed about the relationship of EPAs to APPE readiness in three domains, including: (1) each EPA's relative importance, (2) indicators that a student is not ready to begin APPEs, and (3) each EPA's expected level of entrustment on the first day of the first APPE. We determined consensus of EPA importance and expected level of entrustment by adapting previously published thresholds. We analyzed the association between preceptor or practice setting characteristics with ranking of EPA importance. RESULTS: Of the 431 preceptors queried, 31% responded. Ten EPAs, primarily those reflecting the first three steps of the Pharmacists' Patient Care Process (PPCP), were identified as important with strong consensus. Ambulatory care preceptors placed higher importance on EPAs, primarily in the final steps of the PPCP and within the public health domain. Professionalism issues were most often cited as reasons for a lack of APPE readiness. There was considerable variability (weak or moderate consensus) in preceptors' expected level of entrustment per EPA. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy programs can consider prioritizing EPAs in the domains of patient care and information master when developing APPE readiness plans; professionalism should also be emphasized. Further work is needed to better understand what level of entrustment preceptors expect of an APPE ready student.

A Systematic Review of Interventions Implemented by Pharmacy Programs to Improve Postgraduate Residency Placement.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to identify the impact of interventions implemented by pharmacy programs to support students pursuing postgraduate residency training. METHODS: We conducted a literature search through March 8, 2022 to identify articles that studied an intervention made by a pharmacy program aiming to prepare students to qualify for a postgraduate residency position. Data were collected to describe each study's methods, the included population, and outcomes and to evaluate study risk of bias. FINDINGS: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria. The evidence base is limited to observational data with significant risk of bias. Pharmacy programs use various strategies to deliver training to students opting for the residency application process: elective courses, multiyear curricular tracks, introductory pharmacy practice experiences (IPPEs), and organized professional development events. Participation in these interventions was found to be associated with higher residency match rates, with exception of IPPE where match rates were not evaluated as an outcome. Curricular tracks and multicomponent professional development events were found to be associated with the largest improvement in match rates. Participation in electives or multicomponent professional development was found to be associated with improved student knowledge and confidence in interviews. Multicomponent professional development was also found to be associated with student preparedness for the match process. Curricular tracks and IPPE were found to be associated with improved student knowledge, whereas mock interviews were associated with improved student confidence. SUMMARY: Pharmacy schools support preparation of students for the residency application and interview process in a variety of ways. The current evidence does not support one strategy to be more effective than another. Until additional evidence emerges to guide decisions, schools should select training programs based on balancing the need to support student professional development with resources and workload.

NAPLEX Preparation Program Characteristics and Resources Associated With First-Time Exam Pass Rates.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacy colleges and schools invest substantial faculty effort and financial resources in North America Pharmacist Licensure Exam (NAPLEX) preparation, including vendor products purported to improve NAPLEX pass rates. The objective of this project was to examine NAPLEX preparation program characteristics associated with first-time pass rates. METHODS: A national survey investigated which pharmacy schools provided a formal NAPLEX preparation program in the 2021/2022 academic year, and what resources students were required to use. Pharmacy school characteristics and the unique resources provided in NAPLEX preparation programs were separately analyzed for association with 2022 NAPLEX first-time pass rates. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 71% (100 pharmacy schools). Of the 6 pharmacy school characteristics analyzed, offering a formal NAPLEX preparation program and private status were both weakly correlated with a decrease in the 2022 NAPLEX pass rate, while founding year of 2000 or earlier was weakly correlated with an increase in the pass rate. In a generalized linear model, a decrease in 2022 NAPLEX pass rate was associated with offering a formal NAPLEX preparation program (-5.90% [-11.55 to -0.23]) and with a 3-year accelerated curriculum (-9.15% [-15.55 to -2.75]). Of 12 resources required in NAPLEX preparation programs, 3 were weakly correlated with a decrease in 2022 pass rate: a vendor question bank, vendor review book/materials, and a live, synchronous faculty-led review. In a generalized linear model, a decrease in 2022 NAPLEX pass rate was associated with a live, synchronous faculty-led review (-6.62% [-11.16 to -2.08]). Among schools without a formal preparation program, NAPLEX pass rates consistently exceeded the national average in 2020, 2021, and 2022, while the proportion of schools with NAPLEX preparation programs and first-time pass rates above the national average dropped from 59% in 2021 and 58% in 2020 to 44% in 2022. CONCLUSION: Simply implementing a NAPLEX preparation program is insufficient to overcome other systemic/programmatic influences of successfully passing the NAPLEX; programs should invest earlier resources to address NAPLEX competencies.

A Description of NAPLEX and MPJE Preparation Strategies Among US Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the different strategies used to supplement North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) and Multistate Pharmacy Jurisprudence Examination (MPJE) preparation in the US pharmacy programs. METHODS: An online survey was developed to gather information from 141 accredited schools/colleges of pharmacy about the preparation methods used during the 2021-22 academic year. The questionnaire contained 19 NAPLEX- and 10 MPJE-specific questions related to timing, content, use of commercial products and programs, faculty involvement, and whether these activities were required or recommended. Characteristics of schools/colleges were compared based on the presence or absence of preparation programs; preparation programs were descriptively reported. RESULTS: The response rate was 71%. Most schools (87/100 respondents) provided NAPLEX preparation programs starting in the advanced pharmacy practice experiential year, required students to participate, and focused on reviewing the content instead of assessing students' examination readiness. Similar elements were reported among 61 schools providing MPJE preparation programs. Schools used a variety of resources including access to vendor-based question banks or review materials, and completing live, proctored, NAPLEX-like examinations. Characteristics of schools or colleges did not differ significantly based on presence or absence of a preparation program. CONCLUSION: Schools/colleges of pharmacy use a variety of strategies to prepare students for licensing examinations. Many require student participation in vendor-based preparation programs for NAPLEX, and homegrown programs for MPJE preparation. The next step will be to determine the effectiveness of various approaches used by the schools/colleges on first-time licensure examination attempts.

The impact of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies on gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) may be susceptible to gastrointestinal (GI) effects of medications used for thromboprophylaxis. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of thromboprophylaxis discontinuation due to GI symptoms and GI events. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE (1950-November 2011) and Cochrane Central (through third quarter of 2011) databases was conducted for randomized trials of adults with AF published in English full-text and reporting on discontinuation due to GI symptoms or the incidence of various GI symptoms. RESULTS: Of studies comparing oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), 67%, 100%, and 100% found significantly higher incidences of discontinuation due to GI symptoms, upper GI symptoms, and nondistinct GI symptoms with DTIs, respectively. When comparing aspirin to control therapy, 50% and 33% of trials found significantly higher incidences of discontinuation due to GI symptoms and nondistinct GI symptoms with aspirin, respectively. Aspirin significantly increased the incidence of upper GI symptoms compared to VKAs in 1 trial, but VKAs did not increase the incidence of discontinuation due to GI symptoms and nondistinct GI symptoms versus control. In the only trial comparing a factor Xa inhibitor to VKAs, no significant difference in diarrhea was seen, and when a factor Xa inhibitor was compared to aspirin, there was no significant difference in nondistinct GI symptoms. The incidence of discontinuation due to GI symptoms (4 trials) ranged from 0.0% to 0.4% for control, 0.0% to 2.4% for aspirin, 0.0% to 0.63% for VKA, and 1.2% to 4.7% for oral DTI recipients. The incidence of upper GI symptoms (2 trials) was 1.2% for aspirin, 0.0-5.8% for VKA, 4.2% for VKA plus aspirin, and 11.3-11.8% for DTI recipients. The incidence of nondistinct GI symptoms (7 trials) was 0.0-12.4% for control, 0.2-17.9% for aspirin, 0.0-14.1% for VKA, 23% for DTI, and 2.42% for factor Xa inhibitor recipients. Five trials evaluated diarrhea incidence, which ranged from 0.0% to 12.4% for VKA and 3.2% to 12.2% for oral DTI, and was 5.31% for factor Xa inhibitor recipients. One trial evaluated nausea, with incidences of 1.5% and 2.7% for VKA and DTI recipients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GI adverse events are common in AF trial populations. DTIs were associated with more discontinuations due to GI symptoms and aspirin appeared to increase the incidence of GI symptoms compared to control.