Low back pain management - What Australian community pharmacists recommend and how this compares to current clinical guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a serious and debilitating condition that necessitates proper assessment and management. Community pharmacists are ideally positioned to interact with these patients and provide therapeutic recommendations in line with LBP clinical guidelines, which have changed in recent years. Understanding what therapeutic strategies pharmacists recommend and why, can provide insights into whether these recommendations are in line with current clinical resources. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to examine community pharmacists' views, knowledge and practices in LBP management compared to current clinical guidelines; and investigate their views regarding the accessibility and use of clinical LBP resources. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of Australian community pharmacists was conducted using a structured, self-administered, anonymous online survey. Primary outcomes assessed were pharmacists' views, practices and recommendations in low back pain of different severities, as well as views on the use and accessibility of clinical guidelines. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 176 pharmacists completed the survey. Most recommended non-pharmacological strategies to manage mild symptoms for both adult and teenage groups, escalating to pharmacological with increasing symptom severity. Approximately 75% reported they would recommend ibuprofen over paracetamol for low back pain. Approximately 40% agreed there is difficulty in finding and accessing clinical resources and more than 40% reported being unaware that there are specific guidelines available for the management of LBP symptoms. CONCLUSION: Results from this study highlight an important need to further improve the knowledge and awareness of pharmacists in low back pain management, including locating and accessing clinical resources.

The views of Australian adults experiencing pain on the upscheduling of codeine-containing analgesics to 'prescription only'.

Background Codeine is one of the most commonly used opioids worldwide and is available in different formulations, often combined with other simple analgesics. There is a growing concern of the potential harms associated with codeine misuse in the Australian community, and for this reason codeine containing analgesics have been upscheduled in Australia to 'prescription only medicines' from February 2018. There is currently limited knowledge on the views of Australian adults experiencing pain symptoms on this codeine restriction, and whether this change has impacted their ability to adequately manage their pain. Objective To investigate the views of adults experiencing pain on the 2018 codeine upscheduling in Australia. Setting Adults experiencing pain symptoms, predominantly recruited from Victoria, Australia. Method A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a pre-tested customised anonymous self-administered questionnaire between January and March 2019. To capture a broad range of demographics, participants were recruited from ten Victorian community pharmacies across metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Main outcome measure Opinions of Australian adults experiencing pain to targeted questions regarding the 2018 codeine upscheduling, including perceived advantages and disadvantages. Results A total of 120 participants completed the questionnaire. Sixty-two (52%) participants agreed/strongly agreed that codeine was helpful in alleviating pain symptoms before a prescription was required; while 43% of participants felt the codeine restriction has made it more difficult to manage their pain, with 33% unsure. Participants who were in favour of the codeine upscheduling believed that they are now more encouraged to consult healthcare professionals and make better use of the pain management services made available to them in the Australian community; however some now question the value of pharmacists in this context, given that there is now a reduced array of analgesic medicines available at pharmacies without a prescription. Conclusion This study showed there are mixed views, with some participants being unsure or not in favour of the codeine upscheduling, particularly based on qualitative responses. There is also opportunity in this space for healthcare providers to extend beyond standard practice and offer alternative pain management advice and support now that codeine is no longer available in Australian pharmacies without a prescription.

An Investigation of the Practices of Australian Adults Experiencing Pain and Their Views of Australian Community Pharmacy Pain Management Services.

Pain is a common and debilitating condition requiring appropriate assessment and management. The consequences of inadequate treatment of pain is well known; however, research investigating pain management practices and the benefits Australian community pharmacies offer in pain management are more limited. This study investigated the knowledge and practices of Australian adults experiencing pain, and their views of community pharmacy pain management services. A cross-sectional study was conducted using a pre-tested anonymous self-administered questionnaire. Participants were recruited from ten community pharmacies across metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. A total of 120 participants completed the questionnaire. Most reported that their pain interfered with their quality/functionality-of-life. Paracetamol was the pharmacological preference irrespective of pain severity experienced. Approximately 30% did not believe that visiting a community pharmacy is helpful in pain management, but many reported their pain management knowledge could be improved, yet more than 60% disagreed when asked whether they would rather visit a supermarket than their pharmacy to purchase analgesics. More than half believed that community pharmacies can and should offer more pain management services. This suggests that enhancing the involvement of community pharmacists can help bridge gaps in pain management knowledge, which may provide greater positive outcomes for patients experiencing pain symptoms.

The role of the pharmacist in low back pain management: a narrative review of practice guidelines on paracetamol vs non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Low back pain (LBP) is a common and costly condition and a leading cause of disabilities across the globe. In Australia and other countries, there has been changes in LBP management guidelines and evidence in recent years, including the use of pharmacotherapy. Inadequately treated LBP is a burden with significant health and economic impacts. Although there is some variability, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have largely replaced paracetamol as the first-choice analgesic for non-specific LBP in many international clinical guidelines, including the current Australian Therapeutic Guidelines. More recent clinical evidence also supports that targeting LBP with the use of NSAIDs can provide superior and more effective relief of LBP symptoms compared with paracetamol. Community pharmacists are one of the most accessible and frequently visited health professionals that offer vital primary healthcare services aimed to provide enhanced clinical outcomes for patients. The position of a community pharmacist is pivotal in LBP assessment and management, from both a pharmacological and non-pharmacological standpoint, including the use of clinical guidelines, yet their roles are often not fully utilized in LBP therapy. Studies investigating the community pharmacist's views, practices, knowledge, and roles, specifically in LBP management in Australia are variable and limited. This narrative review will briefly cover the impacts of LBP, and to provide a summary on recent evidence, updates and a comparison of the Australian and international low back pain management guidelines on paracetamol vs NSAIDs in LBP, as well as pharmacists' roles and interventions in a primary healthcare setting in this context

No disponible

The role of the pharmacist in low back pain management: a narrative review of practice guidelines on paracetamol vs non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Low back pain (LBP) is a common and costly condition and a leading cause of disabilities across the globe. In Australia and other countries, there has been changes in LBP management guidelines and evidence in recent years, including the use of pharmacotherapy. Inadequately treated LBP is a burden with significant health and economic impacts. Although there is some variability, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have largely replaced paracetamol as the first-choice analgesic for non-specific LBP in many international clinical guidelines, including the current Australian Therapeutic Guidelines. More recent clinical evidence also supports that targeting LBP with the use of NSAIDs can provide superior and more effective relief of LBP symptoms compared with paracetamol. Community pharmacists are one of the most accessible and frequently visited health professionals that offer vital primary healthcare services aimed to provide enhanced clinical outcomes for patients. The position of a community pharmacist is pivotal in LBP assessment and management, from both a pharmacological and non-pharmacological standpoint, including the use of clinical guidelines, yet their roles are often not fully utilized in LBP therapy. Studies investigating the community pharmacist's views, practices, knowledge, and roles, specifically in LBP management in Australia are variable and limited. This narrative review will briefly cover the impacts of LBP, and to provide a summary on recent evidence, updates and a comparison of the Australian and international low back pain management guidelines on paracetamol vs NSAIDs in LBP, as well as pharmacists' roles and interventions in a primary healthcare setting in this context.

An investigation of the views and practices of Australian community pharmacists on pain and fever management and clinical guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Fever and pain are common conditions in the Australian healthcare setting. Whilst clinical guidelines provide important therapeutic recommendations, evidence suggests they are not always followed. Given that community pharmacy is one of the most frequently accessed primary healthcare services, it is important to understand the views and practices of community pharmacists in pain and fever. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the views and practices of Australian community pharmacists in pain and fever management, and their views on relevant clinical guidelines. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of community pharmacists in Australia was conducted using a customised, anonymous, self-administered, online questionnaire between March and May 2018. To capture a broad range of demographics, pharmacists were recruited via local industry contacts and the Pharmaceutical Society newsletter, with further recruitment through snowball sampling. The main outcomes measured were pharmacists' views, practices and treatment recommendation of choice in pain and fever management, as well as views on clinical guidelines and training. RESULTS: A total of 113 pharmacists completed the survey. In general, paracetamol (72%) was preferred as a recommendation over ibuprofen, and was the drug of choice for most mild to moderate pain and fever scenarios. Majority of pharmacists reported good knowledge of pain and fever management, however, only approximately half reported recent pain management training. Greater than 87% of pharmacists believe that clinical guidelines are useful in fever management, and 79% of pharmacists believe that following clinical guidelines is important in pain management. CONCLUSIONS: While most pharmacists recognise the importance of guidelines and demonstrated good pain and fever management, results suggests opportunities to promote additional education, upskilling, and research in this space to further optimise pain and fever management in the community.

An investigation of the views and practices of Australian community pharmacists on pain and fever management and clinical guidelines

Background: Fever and pain are common conditions in the Australian healthcare setting. Whilst clinical guidelines provide important therapeutic recommendations, evidence suggests they are not always followed. Given that community pharmacy is one of the most frequently accessed primary healthcare services, it is important to understand the views and practices of community pharmacists in pain and fever. Objectives: To investigate the views and practices of Australian community pharmacists in pain and fever management, and their views on relevant clinical guidelines. Methods: A cross-sectional study of community pharmacists in Australia was conducted using a customised, anonymous, self-administered, online questionnaire between March and May 2018. To capture a broad range of demographics, pharmacists were recruited via local industry contacts and the Pharmaceutical Society newsletter, with further recruitment through snowball sampling. The main outcomes measured were pharmacists' views, practices and treatment recommendation of choice in pain and fever management, as well as views on clinical guidelines and training. Results: A total of 113 pharmacists completed the survey. In general, paracetamol (72%) was preferred as a recommendation over ibuprofen, and was the drug of choice for most mild to moderate pain and fever scenarios. Majority of pharmacists reported good knowledge of pain and fever management, however, only approximately half reported recent pain management training. Greater than 87% of pharmacists believe that clinical guidelines are useful in fever management, and 79% of pharmacists believe that following clinical guidelines is important in pain management. Conclusions: While most pharmacists recognise the importance of guidelines and demonstrated good pain and fever management, results suggests opportunities to promote additional education, upskilling, and research in this space to further optimise pain and fever management in the community

No disponible

Expanding the role of Australian pharmacists in community pharmacies in chronic pain management - a narrative review.

Chronic pain is a condition where patients continuously experience pain symptoms for at least 3 to 6 months. It is one of the leading causes of disabilities across the globe. Failure to adequately manage chronic pain often results in additional health concerns that may directly contribute to the worsening symptoms of pain. Community pharmacists are an important healthcare resource that contributes to patient care, yet their roles in chronic pain management are often not fully utilised. This review aimed to investigate and explore pharmacist-driven chronic pain educational and medication management interventions in community pharmacies on an international level, and thereby identify if there are potential benefits in modelling and incorporating these interventions in the Australian community. We found a number of studies conducted in Europe and the United States investigated the benefits of pharmacist-driven educational and medication management interventions in the context of chronic pain management. Results demonstrated that there were improvements in the pain scores, depression/anxiety scales and physical functionality in patient groups receiving the pharmacist driven-interventions, thereby highlighting the clinical benefit of these interventions in chronic pain. In conclusion, pharmacists are trustworthy and responsible advocates for medication reviews and patient education. There are currently very limited formal nationally recognised pharmacist-driven intervention programs dedicated to chronic pain management in Australian community pharmacies. International studies have shown that pharmacist-driven chronic pain interventions undertaken in community pharmacies are of benefit with regards to alleviating pain symptoms and adverse events. Furthermore, it is also clear that research around the application of pharmacist-led chronic pain interventions in Australia is lacking. Modelling interventions that have been conducted overseas may be worth exploring in Australia. The implementation of similar intervention programs for Australian pharmacists in community pharmacies may provide enhanced clinical outcomes for patients suffering from chronic pain. The recently implemented Chronic Pain MedsCheck Trial may provide some answers.

Pharmacists' views on the upscheduling of codeine-containing analgesics to 'prescription only' medicines in Australia.

Background Codeine is the most commonly used opioid worldwide, and is available over-the-counter (OTC) in many countries. There is continual debate regarding the risk:benefit profile for OTC codeine. In Australia, codeine containing analgesics became 'prescription only medicine' from February 2018. However, there is currently limited knowledge on the views of community pharmacists on this upscheduling and the perceived impacts on clinical practice. Objective To investigate the views of community pharmacists on the recent codeine upscheduling in Australia. Setting Community pharmacists in Australia, predominately recruited from Victoria. Method A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a pre-tested customised anonymous self-administered online questionnaire between March and May 2018. To capture a broad range of demographics, pharmacists were recruited via local industry contacts and the Pharmaceutical Society newsletter, with further recruitment through snowball sampling. Main outcome measure Pharmacists' opinions to targeted questions regarding the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the recent 2018 codeine rescheduling from both their perspectives and their perceived impact on patients. Results A total of 113 pharmacists completed the survey. Approximately 43% of pharmacists agreed/strongly agreed that they believed upscheduling will positively impact their ability to manage pain; while 30% were neutral. Approximately 54% of pharmacists agreed/strongly agreed that they believed upscheduling will positively benefit their patients; while 25% were neutral. Perceived advantages for codeine upscheduling included: increased pharmacist/patient engagement, and less codeine use leading to better overall risk:benefit outcome; while disadvantages included: fewer analgesic options, and increased burden for patients, General Practitioners, and the health system. Conclusion This study showed that the current views on the recent codeine upscheduling are quite mixed, with both advantages and disadvantages perceived. Improving education and up-skilling in this space is essential.

Expanding the role of Australian pharmacists in community pharmacies in chronic pain management - a narrative review

Chronic pain is a condition where patients continuously experience pain symptoms for at least 3 to 6 months. It is one of the leading causes of disabilities across the globe. Failure to adequately manage chronic pain often results in additional health concerns that may directly contribute to the worsening symptoms of pain. Community pharmacists are an important healthcare resource that contributes to patient care, yet their roles in chronic pain management are often not fully utilised. This review aimed to investigate and explore pharmacist-driven chronic pain educational and medication management interventions in community pharmacies on an international level, and thereby identify if there are potential benefits in modelling and incorporating these interventions in the Australian community. We found a number of studies conducted in Europe and the United States investigated the benefits of pharmacist-driven educational and medication management interventions in the context of chronic pain management. Results demonstrated that there were improvements in the pain scores, depression/anxiety scales and physical functionality in patient groups receiving the pharmacist driven-interventions, thereby highlighting the clinical benefit of these interventions in chronic pain. In conclusion, pharmacists are trustworthy and responsible advocates for medication reviews and patient education. There are currently very limited formal nationally recognised pharmacist-driven intervention programs dedicated to chronic pain management in Australian community pharmacies. International studies have shown that pharmacist-driven chronic pain interventions undertaken in community pharmacies are of benefit with regards to alleviating pain symptoms and adverse events. Furthermore, it is also clear that research around the application of pharmacist-led chronic pain interventions in Australia is lacking. Modelling interventions that have been conducted overseas may be worth exploring in Australia. The implementation of similar intervention programs for Australian pharmacists in community pharmacies may provide enhanced clinical outcomes for patients suffering from chronic pain. The recently implemented Chronic Pain MedsCheck Trial may provide some answers

No disponible

An Investigation of Sodium Fusidate and Recombinant Cytochrome P450 Enzymes Inhibition In-Vitro.

BACKGROUND: Sodium fusidate (fusidic acid) is an antimicrobial agent that is used in the treatment of staphylococcal and streptococcal infections. Several case reports have noted a drug interaction between sodium fusidate and CYP3A4 metabolised statins, leading to statin toxicity. It is unclear whether sodium fusidate has the potential to cause interactions with other cytochrome P450 enzymes. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of sodium fusidate on recombinant cytochrome P450 enzymes (1A2, 2C9, 2C19, 2D6 and 3A4) in-vitro. METHODS: A range of sodium fusidate concentrations (0.1µM, 1µM, 10µM, 100µM, 300µM, 1000µM and 10000µM) were tested to examine its activity on rCYP1A2, rCYP2C9, rCYP2C19, rCYP2D6 and rCYP3A4 using a luminescent assay with a luciferin substrate. RESULTS: Sodium fusidate inhibited all enzymes at tested concentrations which are relevant to those likely to be achieved in clinical practice. Further, sodium fusidate was found to be a time-dependent inhibitor of all the tested isoenzymes, with the exception of rCYP2C9. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that there is a potential for sodium fusidate to cause drug interactions when used with other agents that are substrates for rCYP1A2, rCYP2C9, rCYP2C19, rCYP2D6 or rCYP3A4. Understanding the basis of this potential drug interaction will assist in safer use of sodium fusidate in clinical practice.