Impact of COVID-19 on Pharmacy Education and Practice: Strategies to Boost Advocacy and Unity among Health Care Organizations.

The global COVID-19 pandemic impacted pharmacy education and changed the pharmacists' scope of practice at the federal and state levels. Based on the Amended Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, pharmacists were authorized to provide essential services, including testing, treatments, and immunizations at various practice settings. Specifically, the United States Food and Drug Administration issued emergency use authorization for several medications, vaccines, and medical devices. The pandemic also affected the regulatory landscape for pharmacists, pharmacy education, access to care, and delivery of pharmacy services in-person and through telehealth. The pandemic's specific impact on pharmacy education heightened awareness of the well-being of the Academy. This commentary will highlight the impact of COVID-19 on both pharmacy education and practice. It will also provide strategies that educators, researchers, and practitioners can take into future research and action to help promote advocacy and unity among pharmacy organizations.

A Systematic and Evidence-Based Review of Published and Pending Reports of Andexanet Alfa.

Andexanet alfa is the newly approved factor Xa inhibitor reversal agent for the treatment of life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding from apixaban or rivaroxaban. This decoy protein directly binds factor Xa inhibitors reversing their action. A systematic and evidence-based evaluation of the available clinical trials is lacking in the literature. This research will provide a systematic and evidence-based evaluation of published clinical trials for andexanet alfa. It will also present an evaluation of active research. Reports of research were identified through multiple databases using search terms andexanet alfa, andexanet, or PRT064445. The level of evidence and strength of recommendation were accomplished using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy. There are 2 published articles presenting 3 clinical trials. Two trials had a low level of evidence and the third trial, a preliminary report of results, showed a moderate level of evidence. The review of active research found 3 unique studies and a preliminary results study. The level of evidence is low for 2 of these studies, moderate for a third, and potentially high for the fourth. The strength of recommendation for all 6 studies is a C. Four of the studies present disease-oriented evidence resulting in a low level of evidence. Another study is unblinded and uncontrolled but presents patient-oriented evidence resulting in a moderate level of evidence. Only one study could score high because the outcome is patient-oriented evidence, and it could achieve follow-up of 80%. There is a need for well-controlled and blinded evaluation to improve the recommendation strength.