Mind, medications & mental disorders: a spiritual approach.

In mental illness, individuals may choose faith-based counseling as primary treatment, with medical care as a supportive adjunct. Biblical Framework Counseling (BFC) is based on belief of the Bible's sufficiency to address the root causes of mental disorders that are not otherwise physiologically caused. Clients address underlying spiritual issues while medical care and pharmacotherapy adherence are encouraged to support symptom relief. Consultation between patient, BFC counselor and healthcare clinician is emphasized to optimize outcomes.

Spiritual care may impact mental health and medication adherence in HIV+ populations.

OBJECTIVE: To explore a potential role for spirituality in medication-related needs assessment for integrated care in chronically ill populations. METHOD: A systematic literature review was conducted to explore the impact of faith beliefs on health and/or medication adherence in individuals with depression and/or HIV+/AIDS. Retrospective electronic medical record review of adult HIV+ patients of an urban primary care clinic with integrated mental health services was conducted, with Substance Abuse and Mental Illness Symptoms Screener (SAMISS), major depressive disorder (MDD) incidence over the preceding year, and history of contact with a spiritual advisor. A convenience sample was interviewed to qualitatively assess potential medication therapy management needs and medication-related problems. Another sample was examined utilizing the Daily Spiritual Experience Scale. RESULTS: The literature reports positive influence on health behaviors, coping and outcomes; and poor medication adherence and treatment decisions due to patient passivity or resistance. Spiritual advisor contact (not limited to a specific religion) was significantly associated with MDD absence (1.7% vs. 15.3%, P<0.005) and inversely related to SAMISS, depression, and poor health behaviors. Patient interviews reflected significance of faith in terms of insight and acceptance of illness, the role or need for medications, coping, and medication adherence. An illustrative model was designed based on the literature and data collection. CONCLUSION: Spiritual assessment may help identify positive or negative influence on health. Spiritual interventions could be beneficial in promoting adherence and positive health outcomes. Further research is recommended.

Poor CD4 count is a predictor of untreated depression in human immunodeficiency virus-positive African-Americans.

AIM: To determine if efforts to improve antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence minimizes the negative impact of depression on human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of a clinic-based cohort of 158 HIV seropositive (HIV+) African Americans screened for major depressive disorder (MDD) in 2012. CD4 T lymphocyte (CD4+) counts were obtained from these individuals. Self-report on adherence to ART was determined from questionnaire administered during clinic visits. The primary outcome measure was conditional odds of having a poorer CD4+ count (< 350 cells/mm(3)). Association between CD4+ count and antidepressant-treated or untreated MDD subjects was examined controlling for self-reported adherence and other potential confounders. RESULTS: Out of 147 individuals with available CD4+ T lymphocyte data, 31% hadCD4+ count < 350 cells/mm(3) and 28% reported poor ART adherence. As expected the group with > 350 cells/mm(3) CD4+ T lymphocyte endorsed significantly greater ART adherence compared to the group with < 350 cells/mm(3) CD4+ T lymphocyte count (P < 0.004). Prevalence of MDD was 39.5% and 66% of individuals with MDD took antidepressants. Poor CD4+ T lymphocyte count was associated with poor ART adherence and MDD. Adjusting for ART adherence, age, sex and education, which were potential confounders, the association between MDD and poor CD4+ T lymphocyte remained significant only in the untreated MDD group. CONCLUSION: Therefore, CD4+ count could be a clinical marker of untreated depression in HIV+. Also, mental health care may be relevant to primary care of HIV+ patients.

Injectable administration privileges among pharmacists in the United States.

PURPOSE: Privileges for administering nonvaccine injectable medications among pharmacists in the United States were assessed. METHODS: An e-mail inquiry on specific protocols for the administration of injectables was sent to the state boards of pharmacy (BOPs) for all 50 states and the District of Columbia that had a valid e-mail address listed on the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy website. Respondents were encouraged to include in their response a link to state regulations so that information from the BOP laws on privileges for administering injectables could be closely reviewed. State guidelines were reviewed online for all BOPs that did not respond to the first e-mail in order to complete the study. A follow-up e-mail was sent only to those respondents whose states granted pharmacists privileges for administering nonvaccine injectables in order to clarify the specific drugs allowed to be injected by pharmacists. RESULTS: Responses received included either links to state regulations or explicit statements of the rules regarding pharmacists' injectable privileges. A total of 21 states currently grant pharmacists articulate written information or rules pertaining to the privilege of administering nonvaccine injectable products. Authority is provided through collaborative practice agreements for most states. Products administered by pharmacists vary by state. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists in 21 states were found to have privileges for administering injectable medications other than vaccines. Pharmacists were authorized to administer these drugs through completion of training approved by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education, collaborative practice agreements, valid prescription orders, board certification, or other broad privileges as specified in state regulations.

The role of colleges and schools of pharmacy in the advent of Healthy People 2020.

As the need for more experiential sites increases, colleges and schools of pharmacy should consider innovative and strategic approaches to expansion including adding programs that would address the target areas emphasized by Healthy People 2020. Healthy People 2020 encompasses the following areas: adolescent health, early and middle childhood, genomics, global health, health information technology, healthcare-associated infections, hearing and other sensory or communicating disorders (ear, nose, throat-voice, speech and language), weight status, older adults, quality of life and well-being, and social determinants of health. Academic leaders should consider what role exists for pharmacy practice in these areas and focus future program and curriculum development on Healthy People 2020 topic areas.