RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy drug handling and occupational exposure are topics of concern for a variety of oncology health care professionals. Inappropriate handling can pose health risks to practitioners particularly, those who handle them on a daily basis. Therefore, this study aimed to assess chemotherapy handling practices among oncology pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey with a structured pre-validated questionnaire. Data was collected from pharmacists and pharmacy technicians who handle chemotherapeutic agents in Saudi Arabia, and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: A total of 79 oncology pharmacy practitioners responded to the survey. The majority (92.4%) had written chemotherapy guidelines at their workplaces. Almost all participants (98.7%) reported the availability of protective gloves and gowns, however, the availability of eye protection was only 57%. Most used chemotherapy-designated gloves (83.6%), and gowns (86.1%). However, 54.4% have reused disposable gowns. The extent of utilization of most protective equipment ranged from 70% (always using closed system transfer device) to 98% (always using shoe cover); while the practice of always using eye protection and face shield was only 30.4% and 38%, respectively. With regard to cleaning practice, the work area was cleaned at least once a day by 35%; monthly decontamination (77%); certification by the biomedical department every 6 months (67%) and at least yearly (95%). Accidental exposure was reported by 28%, and the most common adverse effect was skin irritation (82%). There was no workplace medical surveillance available for 50%. The majority (88.6%) received relevant training, but not periodic updates on their training (38%). The main barriers against the use of personal protective equipment were: that some personal protective equipments were not always available (38%), and personal protective equipments were too uncomfortable to use (30.4%). The demographic variables did not have a statistically significant effect (p > 0.05) on the responses except for type of institution (workplace) on some of the cleaning practices that showed significant differences namely, the monthly decontamination and certification by the biomedical department. CONCLUSIONS: Most protective equipment and chemotherapy guidelines were available, and the majority of pharmacy practitioners adhered to many aspects of chemotherapy safe-handling practices. Nevertheless, some areas such as medical surveillance programs, use of eye protection and face shields, the practice of re-using disposable gowns, some of the barriers against personal protective equipment use, and the provision of periodic training need improvement for better protection of the health care professionals.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antipsychotics are well-known to cause potentially serious and life-threatening adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that have been reported to be also one of the major reasons for non-adherence. In Eritrea, shortage of psychiatrists and physicians, inadequacy of laboratory setups and unavailability of second-generation antipsychotics in the national list of medicines would seem to amplify the problem. This study's objective is to determine the impact of adverse effects of first-generation antipsychotics on treatment adherence in outpatients with schizophrenia at Saint Mary Neuro-Psychiatric National Referral Hospital. METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was employed. All eligible adult patients with diagnosed schizophrenia (n = 242) who visited the hospital during the study period were enrolled. Data on ADRs, adherence and other variables were collected from patients using a self-administered questionnaire, interview and through medical cards review. The collected variables were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 with descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Statistical significance was tested at p value < 0.05. RESULTS: Greater than one-third (35.5%) of the patients with schizophrenia were non-adherent to treatment. The odds of non-adherence increased 1.06 times for each unit increase in the total ADR score (AOR = 1.06, 95% CI 1.04, 1.09). Patients with extrapyramidal (AOR = 44.69, 95% CI 5.98, 334.30), psychic (AOR = 14.90, 95% CI 1.90, 116.86), hormonal (AOR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.41, 4.80), autonomic (AOR = 3.23, 95% CI 1.37, 7.57) and miscellaneous reactions (AOR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.13, 4.13) were more likely to be non-adherent compared to their counterparts. CONCLUSION: Poor treatment adherence was found to be substantial which was attributed to total ADR score, extrapyramidal, hormonal, psychic, autonomic and miscellaneous categories of reactions of the LUNSERS. To improve treatment adherence, early detection and management of adverse effects and inclusion of second-generation antipsychotics are recommended.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: ADRs to antipsychotics are amongst the major challenges in the treatment of patients with psychotic disorders. The extent of patient-reported ADRs assessed in many studies using standardized scales is found to be inconsistent. However, there is a paucity of such research in Eritrea. The aim of the study is therefore to determine the magnitude, nature, and the possible risk factors associated with ADRs of the first generation antipsychotics in outpatients with schizophrenia at Saint Mary Neuro-Psychiatric National Referral Hospital in Asmara, Eritrea, using the LUNSERS self-rating scale. METHODS: A cross-sectional, descriptive and analytical study design utilizing a quantitative approach was employed. Data were collected from patients' self-administered questionnaires, interviews, and medical records. The collected variables were analyzed using SPSS 22.0 with descriptive statistics, correlation, t-tests, ANOVA, and multiple regression. Statistical significance was tested at P-value<0.05. RESULTS: In this study, 93.8% of the research participants experienced at least one ADR. LUNSERS total mean score of the relevant items was 28.01 (SD=18.46) with 24.7% of the study participants scoring medium-to-high. The prevalence of the categories of ADRs was psychic (91.3%), autonomic (78.1%), extra-pyramidal (76.9%), miscellaneous (66.5%), hormonal (58.3%), anti-cholinergic (44.2%), and allergic reactions (44.2%). At multivariate level, factors significantly and positively associated with total ADR score were smoking (P=0.028) and being at secondary educational level (P=0.015). CONCLUSION: There was high prevalence of ADRs with moderate-to-high overall ADR scores in a significant number of patients. The most frequently reported ADRs were psychic, autonomic, extra-pyramidal, hormonal, and miscellaneous. Smoking and secondary level of education were found to be the main determinants of ADRs.
