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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

A Bibliometric Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Journal Publications of Pharmacy Practice Department Chairs.

Objective. To perform a bibliometric analysis of pharmacy practice department chairs at US schools and colleges of pharmacy to determine factors associated with their level of scholarly productivity.Methods. Scopus was searched for all publications by pharmacy practice chairs from all pharmacy schools through August 11, 2020. Publication metrics (total number of publications and citations and the Hirsch-index (h-index), and year of first publication), as well as characteristics of the individual chair and institution were collected. Characteristics were compared across groups. A generalized linear model was used to determine the correlation between the total number of publications and h-index to school ranking by US News & World Report (USNWR).Results. One hundred forty-one pharmacy practice chairs were identified. The majority were male and at the rank of professor, with a similar proportion from public and private institutions. The median total number of publications and citations was 19 and 247, respectively, with a median h-index of eight. Compared with female chairs, male chairs had a higher median total of publications and citations and a higher h-index. Chairs at public institutions had a higher median total of publications and citations and a higher publication rate, h-index, and m quotient. The USNWR ranking for the school was significantly correlated with total publications and the h-index.Conclusion. Pharmacy practice chairs vary significantly in their scholarship productivity, although those at institutions with a larger emphasis on research were more prolific. Observed differences in the publication metrics of male and female chairs warrants further study to determine possible explanations for this finding and its potential impact.

Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Underweight Hospitalized Patients.

There is limited evidence about optimal anticoagulant dosing for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in underweight patients. The purpose of this study was to characterize dosing strategies used in underweight patients and compare the incidence of bleeding and VTE to patients receiving a standard dose. This multi-center retrospective study evaluated medicine patients who weighed 45 kilograms or less and received VTE prophylaxis with unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin. We categorized subjects into groups as either standard or reduced dose and compared the incidence of bleeding and VTE between groups. Of the 300 patients included in the outcome analysis, 40.7% received a reduced dose regimen, most often enoxaparin 30 mg daily. Standard dose was associated with major bleeding compared with reduced dose, when adjusted for age, gender and admission hemoglobin (odds ratio 4.73, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 21.34). Incidence of clinically relevant non-major bleeding (2.4% vs. 1.1%) and VTE (0.6% vs. 0%) were similar between groups. Anticoagulant dose reduction for VTE prophylaxis in underweight hospitalized medicine patients is common practice and associated with less major bleeding.

Integration of a Virtual Dispensing Simulator "MyDispense" in an Experiential Education Program to Prepare Students for Community Introductory Pharmacy Practice Experience.

BACKGROUND: Technology is increasingly used to enhance pharmacy education. We sought to evaluate student learning and preparedness for community introductory pharmacy practice experiences (IPPEs) after implementation of "MyDispense" into experiential education. METHODS: Both first-year pharmacy students and assigned community IPPE preceptors were eligible. Students were stratified based on previous community pharmacy experience (< or ≥ 50 h), then randomized to complete MyDispense exercises before IPPE (group A) or after 24-32 h of IPPE (group B). We evaluated preceptors' assessment of student readiness using a 6-item Likert scale survey and students' readiness and opinion of MyDispense using an anonymous 9-item survey. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize data. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare groups and a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of 177 eligible students, 155 were randomized and 56 completed study. Group A included 32 students; 56.3% had prior community practice experience. Group B included 24 students; 50% had prior community practice experience. Forty-eight preceptors were enrolled. Students who completed exercises before rotation received higher preceptor scores for patient counseling of self-care and of medications (p < 0.05 for both). Students self-assessed their counseling skills lower than all other skills; 30.4% and 42.9% of students felt mostly or always prepared to counsel for self-care and medications, respectively. Students found MyDispense straightforward, realistic, and appreciated the ability to practice in a safe, electronic, community pharmacy, patient-care environment. CONCLUSION: Simulation-based software, such as MyDispense, can enhance learner understanding of the prescription fill and counseling process in a community pharmacy practice setting.

Influence of digoxin on mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation: Overview of systematic reviews.

Once a routine part of atrial fibrillation (AF) management, digoxin use has declined. Likely hastening this decline are findings from several studies and systematic reviews identifying a potential association between digoxin use and all-cause mortality in AF populations. However, inconsistency exists within some of these studies potentially leading to confusion among clinicians. To critically evaluate the current literature to contextualize the associations between digoxin and mortality risk in patients with AF by performing an overview of systematic reviews. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Database of Systematic Reviews, and SCOPUS from their earliest date through October 12, 2020, to identify systematic reviews (SRs) that included studies enrolling patients with AF or atrial flutter and evaluated the association between digoxin use and all-cause mortality. We used the AMSTAR 2 tool to assess the risk of bias for each included SR. Results from reviews are qualitatively synthesized. Our search identified 10 SRs that met our inclusion criteria. Of the 41 unique AF studies included in these SRs, 41% were cohort studies, 29% were post hoc analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 15% were RCTs, and 15% were registry studies. Based on our AMSTAR 2 assessment, the overall confidence in the results of the 10 reviews was rated as "moderate" in three SRs, "low" in three SRs, and "critically low" in the rest. Except for one review, each included SR shows that digoxin use in AF is associated with a 15 to 38% higher risk of all-cause mortality. This association may be greater when AF-only populations are considered compared with a mix of AF and heart failure populations. Serum digoxin concentration (SDC) data were infrequently considered, but available data suggested a greater association between increasing SDC and all-cause mortality. This overview of reviews found general consistency regarding the association between digoxin use and higher all-cause mortality in AF populations. However, heterogeneity exists among and between SRs and an unmet need exists for additional study in a RCT setting with close monitoring and reporting of SDC to better inform clinical practice.

Toxicity of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine following therapeutic use or overdose.

INTRODUCTION: While chloroquine, a derivative of quinine, has been used as an antimalarial for 70 years, hydroxychloroquine is now used to treat conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus. In 2020, hydroxychloroquine (and to a lesser extent chloroquine) also received attention as a possible treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). During investigation for treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2, concerns for serious adverse events arose. OBJECTIVE: We review the toxicity associated with hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine use both short-term and long-term and in overdose. METHODS: Medline (via OVID) was searched from its inception through June 7 2020 using the following as either MeSH or keyword terms: ("Chloroquine/" or "Hydroxychloroquine/") AND ("Adverse Drug Event/" or "Toxicities, Drug/" or "Toxic.mp." or "Toxicity.mp." or "Overdose.mp."). We limited resultant articles to those published in English and reporting on Human subjects. This search yielded 330 articles, of which 57 were included. Articles were excluded due to lack of relevance, not reporting desired outcomes, or being duplicative in their content. Twenty-five additional articles were identified through screening references of included articles. To identify toxicities in individuals treated with hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with COVID-19, we searched PubMed on June 10th, 2020: ("Chloroquine" or "Hydroxychloroquine") AND ("Coronavirus" or "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2"). This search resulted in 638 articles. We reviewed articles for reporting of adverse events or toxicities. Most citations were excluded because they did not include original investigations or extrapolated data from subjects that did not have COVID-19; 34 citations were relevant. For the drug-interactions section, relevant classes and agents were identified through a screen of the https://www.covid19-druginteractions.org/ website. We then conducted targeted searches of PubMed up to June 7th 2020 combining "chloroquine" and "hydroxychloroquine" with terms for specific drug classes and drugs identified from the drug-interaction site as potentially relevant. We found 29 relevant articles. TOXICITY WITH SHORT-TERM USE: Gastrointestinal: Gastrointestinal toxicities are the most common to occur following initiation of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea account for most reported intolerances. Glucose abnormalities: Alterations in blood glucose concentrations may occur with hydroxychloroquine but are rare with standard therapeutic use. Cardiotoxicity: Short-term use can produce conduction abnormalities. Evidence from COVID-19 treatment suggests QT/QTc prolongation is of concern, particularly when used in combination with azithromycin, although disagreement exists across studies. Dermatologic: Drug eruptions or rashes, followed by cutaneous hyperpigmentation, pruritis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis, may occur within days to weeks of exposure but usually resolve with the discontinuation of therapy. Neuropsychiatric: Reported symptoms include confusion, disorientation, and hallucination within 24-48 h of drug initiation. Other toxicities: Hemolysis and anemia may occur in patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase. Chloroquine treatment of COVID-19 was associated with elevation in creatine kinase and creatine kinase-MB activities with more events in the higher-dose group. TOXICITY WITH LONG-TERM USE: Retinopathy: Retinopathy is the major dose-limiting toxicity associated with long-term use; the risk is higher with increasing age, dose, and duration of usage. Cardiotoxicity: Long-term use has been associated with conduction abnormalities, cardiomyopathy, and valvular disorders. Neurotoxicity: Rarely myositis and muscle weakness, extremity weakness, and pseudoparkinsonism have been reported. TOXICITY IN OVERDOSE: Symptoms in overdose manifest rapidly (minutes to hours) and cardiotoxicity such as cardiovascular shock and collapse are most prominent. Neurotoxic effects such as psychosis and seizure may also occur. CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxychloroquine is a generally well-tolerated medication. Short-term (days to weeks) toxicity includes gastrointestinal effects and rarely glucose abnormalities, dermatologic reactions, and neuropsychiatric events. Cardiotoxicity became of increased concern with its use in COVID-19 patients. Long-term (years) toxicities include retinopathy, neuromyotoxicity, and cardiotoxicity (conduction abnormalities, cardiomyopathy). Deaths from overdoses most often result from cardiovascular collapse.

Systematic Review of mHealth Applications That Interface with Inhaler Sensors in Asthma.

BACKGROUND: A better understanding of outcomes associated with mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) for asthma self-management that pair with inhaler sensor technology is needed for clinicians to practice evidence-based medicine. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of mHealth apps that integrate with an inhaler-based sensor on outcomes of patients with asthma. METHODS: We performed a systematic review in GooglePlay and Apple App stores for consumer-facing mHealth apps for asthma management that pair with an inhaler-based sensor. We then searched for evidence evaluating these apps via PubMed and Cochrane Central (January 2007-May 2020), bibliographies on product websites, and www.clinicaltrials.gov. We included studies in patients with asthma evaluating apps discovered in the app stores on adherence or a health outcome of interest, and qualitatively summarized evidence. RESULTS: We identified 6 mHealth apps and screened 2594 citations for evidence on these apps; 7 studies of 2 apps were included. Interventions modestly improved maintenance inhaler adherence and reduced rescue inhaler use but did not impact Asthma Control Test scores. Effects on exacerbations, quality of life, and pulmonary function were not evaluated in these studies. CONCLUSIONS: The current literature evaluating mHealth apps paired with inhaler-based sensors focuses on a small number of available products and has limitations in quality. Positive effects on rescue inhaler use, inhaler adherence, and patient satisfaction were found. However, more comprehensive evaluation of products and their impact on health outcomes is needed before clinicians and patients can weigh the benefits against resources needed to adopt these technologies.

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.

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.

The impact of non-medical switching among ambulatory patients: an updated systematic literature review.

Background: Non-medical switching (NMS) is defined as switching to a clinically similar but chemically distinct medication for reasons apart from lack of effectiveness, tolerability or adherence. Objective: To update a prior systematic review evaluating the impact of NMS on outcomes. Data sources: An updated search through 10/1/2018 in Medline and Web of Science was performed. Study selection: We included studies evaluating ≥25 patients and measuring the impact of NMS of drugs on ≥1 endpoint. Data extraction: The direction of association between NMS and endpoints was classified as negative, positive or neutral. Data synthesis: Thirty-eight studies contributed 154 endpoints. The direction of association was negative (n = 48; 31.2%) or neutral (n = 91; 59.1%) more often than it was positive (n = 15; 9.7%). Stratified by endpoint type, NMS was associated with a negative impact on clinical, economic, health-care utilization and medication-taking behavior in 26.9%,41.7%,30.3% and 75.0% of cases; with a positive effect seen in 3.0% (resource utilization) to 14.0% (clinical) of endpoints. Of the 92 endpoints from studies performed by the entity dictating the NMS, 88.0%were neutral or positive; whereas, only 40.3%of endpoints from studies conducted separately from the interested entity were neutral or positive. Conclusions: NMS was commonly associated with negative or neutral endpoints and was seldom associated with positive ones.