Cultural adaptation and validation of instruments for measuring the flipped classroom experience.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, a revamped bachelor of pharmacy program was introduced at Monash University and incorporated a predominantly flipped classroom-based pedagogy. The attitudes and preferences of students towards this program had yet to be assessed using a reliable instrument. Since no instrument was readily available, the objective of this study was to identify, contextualize, and validate a suitable instrument. METHODS: We conducted a literature search to identify and adapt a validated instrument. Cognitive interviews were conducted to examine students' understanding of scales and definitions of items. The instrument was then evaluated by education experts for further refinement. The reliability of the final instrument was assessed in a cohort of students, and unsuitable items were removed. RESULTS: Students had issues understanding the scales and specific terms used in the original instrument, potentially due to differences in terminologies used in the university's context and variance in English proficiency levels and exposure. In the preference domain, wording of the instrument to present exclusively traditional classroom or exclusively flipped classroom statements greatly influenced its reliability. This could be due to exposure of students to a predominantly flipped classroom environment since inception. The final instrument optimized in this study had α = 0.85, 0.86, and 0.9 for the pre-activities, in-class lectures, and in-class workshops attitude domains, respectively, and α = 0.73 for the preference domain. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the necessity of contextualizing instruments to fit the local context in which they are administered and provides key recommendations when conducting such adaptations.

Directly Acting Antivirals for COVID-19: Where Do We Stand?

The outbreak of a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) in Wuhan, China in December 2019 has now become a pandemic with no approved therapeutic agent. At the moment, the genomic structure, characteristics, and pathogenic mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 have been reported. Based upon this information, several drugs including the directly acting antivirals have been proposed to treat people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This rapid review aims to describe the directly acting antivirals that have been examined for use in the management of COVID-19. Searches were conducted in three electronic databases, supplemented with a search on arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, ChinaXiv, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry for studies examining the use of antivirals in COVID-19 to identify for case reports, case series, observational studies, and randomized controlled studies describing the use of antivirals in COVID-19. Data were extracted independently and presented narratively. A total of 98 studies were included, comprising of 38 published studies and 60 registered clinical trials. These drugs include the broad spectrum antivirals such as umifenovir, protease inhibitors such as lopinavir/ritonavir as well as the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase inhibitors, remdesivir, and favipiravir. Other drugs that have been used include the nucleosidase inhibitors and polymerase acidic endonuclease inhibitors which are currently approved for prevention of influenza infections. While some of the drugs appear promising in small case series and reports, more clinical trials currently in progress are required to provide higher quality evidence.

Efficacy of Pharmacist Based Diabetes Educational Interventions on Clinical Outcomes of Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Background: Comparative efficacy of different pharmacist based interventions on glycemic control of type 2 diabetes patients is unclear. This review aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of different pharmacist based interventions on clinical outcomes of type 2 diabetes patients. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across five databases from date of database inception to September 2017. All randomized clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of pharmacist based interventions on type 2 diabetes patients were included for network meta-analysis (NMA). The protocol is available with PROSPERO (CRD42017078854). Results: A total of 43 studies, involving 6259 type 2 diabetes patients, were included. NMA demonstrated that all interventions significantly lowered glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels compared to usual care, but there was no statistical evidence from this study that one intervention was significantly better than the other for reducing HbA1c levels. Pharmacist based diabetes education plus pharmaceutical care showed maximum efficacy for reducing HbA1c levels [-0.86, 95% CI -0.983, -0.727; p < 0.001]. Pharmacist based diabetes education plus pharmaceutical care was observed to be statistically significant in lowering levels of systolic blood pressure [-4.94; 95%CI -8.65, -1.23] and triglycerides levels [-0.26, 95%CI -0.51, -0.01], as compared to the interventions which involved diabetes education by pharmacist, and for body mass index (BMI) [-0.57; 95%CI -1.25, -0.12] in comparison to diabetes education by health care team involving pharmacist as member. Conclusion: The findings of this review demonstrate that all interventions had a significantly positive effect on HbA1c, but there was no statistical evidence from this study that one intervention was significantly better than the other for achieving glycemic control.Pharmacist based diabetes education plus pharmaceutical care showed maximum efficacy on HbA1c and rest of the clinical outcomes.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Combined Epinephrine and Corticosteroid Therapy for Acute Bronchiolitis in Infants.

Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of combined epinephrine and corticosteroid therapy for acute bronchiolitis in infants. Methods: Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL) were searched from their inception to February 28, 2017 for studies involving infants aged less than 24 months with bronchiolitis which assessed the use of epinephrine and corticosteroid combination therapy. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the effect estimates. The primary outcomes were hospital admission rate and length of hospital stay. Results: Of 1,489 citations identified, 5 randomized controlled trials involving 1,157 patients were included. All studies were of high quality and low risk of bias. Results of the meta-analysis showed no significant differences in the primary outcomes. Hospitalization rate was reduced by combinatorial therapy of epinephrine and corticosteroid in only one out of five studies, whereas pooled data indicated no benefit over epinephrine plus placebo. Clinical severity scores were significantly improved in all five RCTs when assessed individually, but no benefit was observed compared to epinephrine monotherapy when the data were pooled together. Pooled data showed that combination therapy was more effective at improving oxygen saturation level (mean difference: -0.70; 95% confidence interval: -1.17 to -0.22, p = 0.004). There was no difference in the risk of serious adverse events in infants treated with the combined epinephrine and corticosteroid therapy. Conclusions: Combination treatment of epinephrine and dexamethasone was ineffective in reducing hospital admission and length of stay among infants with bronchiolitis.

Telemedicine for the Management of Glycemic Control and Clinical Outcomes of Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies.

Importance: Telemedicine has been shown to be an efficient and effective means of providing care to patients with chronic disease especially in remote and undeserved regions, by improving access to care and reduce healthcare cost. However, the evidence surrounding its applicability in type 1 diabetes remains scarce and conflicting. Objective: To synthesize evidence and quantify the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions for the management of glycemic and clinical outcomes in type 1 diabetes patients, relative to comparator conditions. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched for published articles since inception until December 2016. Study Selection: Original articles reporting the results of randomized controlled studies on the effectiveness of telemedicine in people with type 1 diabetes were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed quality, and strength of evidence. Interventions were categorized based upon the telemedicine focus (monitoring, education, consultation, case-management, and peer mentoring). Main Outcome and Measure: Absolute change in glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to follow-up assessment. Results: A total of 38 studies described in 41 articles were identified. Positive effects on glycemic control were noted with studies examining telemedicine, with a mean reduction of 0.18% at the end of intervention. Studies with longer duration (>6 months) who had recruited patients with a higher baseline HbA1c (≥9%) were associated with larger effects. Telemedicine interventions that involve individualized assessments, audit with feedback and skill building were also more effective in improving glycemic control. However, no benefits were observed on blood pressure, lipids, weight, quality of life, and adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: There is insufficient evidence to support telemedicine use for glycemic control and other clinically relevant outcome among patients with type 1 diabetes.