Availability and Affordability of Essential Palliative Care Medicines in Nepal: A Cross-Sectional Study.

CONTEXT: The government of Nepal adopted the 2017 Nepalese National Strategy for Palliative Care (NSPC), which proposed that Essential Palliative Care Medicines (EPCMs) listed by the International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care (IAHPC) should be available at each healthcare institution. In 2017 after the issuing of NSPC, the Lancet Commission developed an EPCM list. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the inclusion of EPCMs recommended by both IAHPC and Lancet in national medicinal programmes, their availability, and affordability in Nepal. METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study of the availability of EPCMs in Nepal, and their inclusion in the national essential medicines list, government health insurance medicines list, government fixed rate medicines list, and free medicines list. Affordability was assessed using the World Health Organization Daily-Define-Dose and the Nepal Government-defined minimum daily wage. RESULTS: A total of 27 of 33 (82%) of the IAHPC-EPCMs and 41 of 60 (68%) of the recommended formulations were available in Nepal. All the Lancet Commission recommended EPCMs were available in Nepal. Morphine was available in all formulations used in palliative care. 22%, 18%, and 10% of IAHPC-EPCMs were available cost-free via district hospitals, primary healthcare centers, and health posts, respectively. The government had not included opioids on both free and fixed price lists. A total of 24 of 33 (73%) IAHPC-EPCMs were available on the Government Health Insurance Medicines List. A total of 19 of 41 (46%) available EPCMs were affordable. CONCLUSION: Many EPCM formulations included in NSPC of Nepal are not available, and most available EPCMs are unaffordable if purchased out-of-pocket. While the availability is better with the government health insurance scheme, many people are not registered for this. Further improvements should follow the development of a Nepalese palliative care formulary.

Deprescribing Tool for Older PeoPle with Limited-life Expectancy (De-TOPPLE) version 1: Development and validation using a modified Delphi technique.

Deprescribing decision making in older adults with limited life expectancy is often challenging for clinicians. We aimed to develop and validate a Deprescribing Tool for Older People with Limited-life Expectancy (De-TOPPLE). Modified Delphi technique was used to gain experts' consensus on the tool and further develop using their feedback. Experts [Round-1 (n = 13), Round-2 (n = 7)] had clinical and/or research background on geriatric medicine, geriatrics, family medicine or pharmacotherapy. Round-1 consensus was achieved on approach taken by the tool to evaluate risk and benefit; distinguishing medications as preventive, symptom control or dual-purpose; referring to established deprescribing process; stepwise approach to deprescribing; and the overall concept. Common feedback was to reflect upon harm-benefit analysis, distinguish medication types earlier, qualify adverse events, use time-to-benefit (TTB), prioritise symptom relief, monitor post-deprescribing, include shared decision making and define terms for clinical familiarisation. After tool update, Round-2 consensus was achieved on usability in clinical setting, flexibility of implicit judgement, ceasing preventive medication with inadequate TTB, ceasing symptom control medication with inadequate symptom relief, ceasing dual-purpose medication (DPM) with inadequate TTB and symptom relief, and continuing DPM with adequate TTB and symptom relief. De-TOPPLE version 1 was developed and validated through two rounds of the Delphi process. Clinical use of the tool needs final validation following the addition of contextual statements to the tool.

Proximal radioulnar synostosis following Monteggia fracture-dislocation: a case report.

Introduction and importance: Radioulnar synostosis is a rare complication of a forearm fracture that restricts pronation-supination. This study presents a case of proximal radioulnar synostosis in an adult male after Monteggia fracture-dislocation who had a loss of pronation and supination movements. Case presentation: Herein, we report a case of proximal radioulnar synostosis in a 43-year-old man who presented with loss of pronation and supination of the right forearm that restricted his daily activities. He had a history of Monteggia fracture-dislocation 9 months back, which was managed with open reduction and internal fixation with a dynamic compression plate. Plain radiography and computed tomography of the right forearm after 9 months of operation showed an implant in situ with proximal radioulnar synostosis. Implant removal was performed and the excess fibro-osseous connection in the proximal radius and ulna was removed. Clinical discussion: Forearm injuries that affect the interosseous membrane may result in radioulnar synostosis. Trauma and treatment-related factors increase the risk of radioulnar synostosis. The fibro-osseous fusion between the forearm bones restricts the pronation and supination movements. Conclusion: Loss of pronation-supination following forearm fracture should raise suspicion of radioulnar synostosis.

Impact of hospital pharmacist-delivered individualised pharmaceutical service intervention on clinical and patient-reported outcomes in patients with hypertension: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with hypertension in Nepal are often known to have poor medication adherence and quality of life. This randomised controlled trial aimed to evaluate the impact of a hospital pharmacist-delivered individualised pharmaceutical service (P-DIPS) intervention on blood pressure, medication adherence and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with hypertension in a hospital setting in Nepal. METHODS: In an open trial, 56 adult patients with hypertension who had been receiving antihypertensive medication for ≥6 months were randomly allocated to a control group (n=28) which received the usual care and an intervention group (n=28) which received a P-DIPS along with the usual care. The difference in blood pressure, medication adherence and HRQoL between the two groups at baseline, 2 and 4 months was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test, independent t-test or χ2 tests. RESULTS: Participants were mostly ≥40 years (86%) and female (57%). There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between the control (C) and intervention (I) groups. At 2 months, the two groups had a significant improvement in the median (IQR) Morisky-Green-Levine (MGL) Medication Adherence Score (I=1 (2) vs C=2 (2); p<0.001) and the median (IQR) mental component of HRQoL (I=43.6 (9.5) vs C=37.5 (8.6); p=0.013). At 4 months, there were significant differences in the median (IQR) values of all the outcome measures between the groups (systolic blood pressure: I=125 (10) mmHg vs C=130 (15) mmHg, p=0.008; diastolic blood pressure: 80 (14) mmHg vs 90 (10) mmHg, p=0.012; MGL score: I=1 (1) vs C=2 (1), p<0.001; physical component of HRQoL: 45.0 (9.0) vs 40.3 (8.2), p=0.046; and mental component of HRQoL: 47.1 (11.1) vs 38.8 (8.5), p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that a P-DIPS intervention in the hospital setting of Nepal has a significant potential to improve blood pressure, medication adherence and HRQoL in patients with hypertension.

A systematic review on methods for developing and validating deprescribing tools for older adults with limited life expectancy.

OBJECTIVES: A number of deprescribing tools are available to assist clinicians to make decisions on medication management. We aimed to review deprescribing tools that may be used with older adults that have limited life expectancy (LLE), including those at the palliative and end-of-life stage, and consider the rigour with which the tools were developed and validated. KEY FINDINGS: Literature was searched in PubMed, Embase, CINHAL and Google Scholar until February 2021 for studies involving the development and/or consensus validation of deprescribing tools targeting those aged ≥65 years with LLE. We were interested in the tool development process, tool validation process and clinical components addressed by the tool.Six studies were included. The approaches followed for tool development were systematic review (n = 3), expert-literature review (n = 2) and concept data (n = 1). The content included a list of disease-non-specific medications divided with or without recommendations (n = 4) and disease-specific medications with recommendations (n = 2). The tool validation was performed using the Delphi method (n = 4) or GRADE framework (n = 2) with panel size ranging from 8 to 17 and 60-80% consensus agreement with or without a rating scale. LLE targeted were ≤1 year (n = 2) or ≤3 months (n = 1). SUMMARY: There is a limited number of deprescribing tools with consensus validation available for use in older adults with LLE. These tools are either targeted for disease-specific medication/medication class guided by the GRADE framework or targeted for a list of medications or medication classes irrespective of disease that are developed using a combination of approaches and validated using a Delphi method.

Development and validation of a tool to understand health care professionals' attitudes towards deprescribing (HATD) in older adults with limited life expectancy.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the perspective of health care professionals (HCPs) is significant to the implementation of deprescribing in older adults with limited life expectancy (LLE) but a tool to assess this is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and validate a survey tool for assessing HCPs attitudes towards deprescribing (HATD) in older adults with LLE. METHODS: An online survey was used to collect data to determine the psychometric properties of a 49-item questionnaire generated from literature review, expert opinion and pretesting. 108 HCPs (doctors, nurses and pharmacists) with experience or interest in palliative care or a member of a palliative care team/organisation completed the survey. RESULTS: Principal component analysis of the participants' data resulted in a 23-item questionnaire structured in five factors, named HATD tool. The factors were related to concerns about deprescribing (7 items), perceived burden of medications on patients (7 items), organisational support for deprescribing (4 items), assurance to deprescribing (2 items) and perceived involvement of patients in medication management (3 items). The HATD tool had valid descriptive statistics (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure: 0.708; Bartlett's test of sphericity: p < 0.001, determinant: 1.35E-5; variance explained: 60.4%; nonredundant residuals with absolute values > 0.05: 39%). The reliability statistics of all the factors were ≥0.750 for both Cronbach's alpha (α) and composite reliability (CR) except for the patient-involvement factor (α = 0.644 but CR = 0.787). CONCLUSIONS: The 23-itemed HATD tool is a valid and reliable tool to assess the attitudes and beliefs of HCPs towards deprescribing in older adults with LLE in the Australian setting.

Pharmacy practice in emergency response during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons from Australia.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the pharmacy practice and initiatives taken by the Australian federal government to ensure the continued supply of essential medicines under the conditions of an emergency response plan for COVID-19. During the pandemic, Australian pharmacists have been working collaboratively with multidisciplinary teams at the frontline to manage the equitable and safe supply of medicines despite the unprecedented situation. Although these presented problems for small pharmacies, social distancing policies were implemented widely to maintain personal and environmental hygiene and reduce the number of face-to-face patient visits. In collaboration with various pharmaceutical stakeholders, the Australian government responded rapidly to ensure equitable and sufficient supply with continued access to therapeutic goods during the pandemic. Additionally, vital policies and practices have been implemented, including supplying regular medicines at government-subsidized prices, a maximum one-month supply of some prescription medicines and purchase limits on over-the-counter medicines (one unit per purchase), medication management reviews through telehealth, electronic and digital prescribing, home delivery of medicines to vulnerable people and those in home isolation and the provision of serious shortage medicine substitution rights to pharmacists. Pharmacists were encouraged to communicate and collaborate with other local pharmacies to ensure that essential pharmacy services met community needs (e.g., opening hours). However, there has been a shortage of some medicines due to supply chain disruption and increased demand due to the pandemic. Higher demand for flu vaccinations, increased work pressure in pharmacies, and severe frustration and anxiety in pharmacy customers were also reported. Vigilance is required to monitor foreseeable shortages of therapeutics goods, particularly in regional pharmacies. There is an opportunity for long-term change to retain certain rights and roles based on the competence shown by pharmacists in this challenging period, such as telephone medication reviews, telehealth for MedsCheck and Diabetes MedsCheck, digital prescription handling and therapeutic substitution.

Impact of deprescribing dual-purpose medications on patient-related outcomes for older adults near end-of-life: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The decision to deprescribe medications used for both disease prevention and symptom control (dual-purpose medications or DPMs) is often challenging for clinicians. We aim to establish the impact of deprescribing DPMs on patient-related outcomes for older adults near end-of-life (EOL). METHODS: This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline. Literature was searched on PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Google Scholar until December 2019 for studies on deprescribing intervention with a control group (with or without randomisation); targeting ⩾65-year olds, at EOL, with at least one life-limiting illness and at least one potentially inappropriate DPM. We were interested in any patient-related outcomes. Studies with similar outcome assessment criteria were subjected to meta-analysis and narrative synthesis otherwise. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias and ROBINS-I tools for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental non-randomised controlled studies, respectively. RESULTS: Five studies covering 689 participants with mean age 81.6-85.7 years, the majority (74.6-100%) with dementia were included. The risk of bias was moderate to low. The deprescribing of DPMs lowered the risk of mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.44-0.79) and referral to acute care facilities (RR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.22-0.73), but did not have a significant impact on the risk of falls, non-vertebral fracture, emergency presentation, unplanned hospital admission, or general practitioner visits. No significant difference was observed in the quality of life, physical and cognitive functions between the intervention and control groups. CONCLUSION: There is some evidence that deprescribing of DPMs for older adults near the EOL can lower the risk of mortality and referral to acute care facilities, but there are insufficient good-quality studies powered to confirm a benefit in terms of quality of life, physical or cognitive function, health service utilisation and adverse events. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: What is the health impact of withdrawal or dose reduction of medication used for disease prevention and symptom control in older adults near end-of-life? Introduction: Older adults (aged ⩾ 65 years) with advanced diseases such as cancer, dementia, and organ failure tend to have a limited life expectancy. With the progression of these diseases towards the end-of-life, the intensity for day-to-day supportive care becomes increasingly necessary. The use of medications for symptom management is a critical part of such care, but the use of medications for long-term disease prevention can become irrelevant due to the already shortened life expectancy and may become harmful due to alterations in physiology and pharmacology associated with age and frailty. This necessitates the withdrawal or dose reduction of inappropriate medications, the process called deprescribing. The decision to deprescribe medications used for both disease prevention and symptom control (DPMs) in this population is often challenging for clinicians. In this context, whether deprescribing of DPMs can improve patient-related health outcomes is unknown.Methods: Evidence from the literature was reviewed and analysed, and the quality of studies was assessed. Five studies were identified, which had 689 participants with an average age above 80 years and mostly suffering from dementia.Results: The analysis of these studies showed deprescribing of DPMs lowered the risk of death and referral to acute care facilities at 12 months but had no significant impact on falls, non-vertebral fractures, emergency presentations, unplanned hospital admission, general practitioner visits, quality of life, physical and mental functions.Conclusion: In conclusion, there were insufficient numbers of high-quality studies powered to confirm whether deprescribing of DPMs reduces adverse events, health service use, or improves the quality of life or functioning in older adults near the end of life.

Antibiotic utilization, sensitivity, and cost in the medical intensive care unit of a tertiary care teaching hospital in Nepal.

BACKGROUND: High utilization and irrational use of antibiotics in an intensive care unit increases microbial resistance, morbidity, mortality, and costs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the utilization, sensitivity and cost analysis of antibiotics used in the medical intensive care unit of a tertiary care teaching hospital of Nepal. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit at a tertiary care teaching hospital in central Nepal from July to September 2016. Antibiotic utilization, defined daily dose per 100 bed-days and the cost of antibiotics per patient were calculated. Descriptive statistics were performed using IBM-SPSS 20.0. RESULTS: A total of 365 antibiotics were prescribed in 157 patients during the study period, with an average of 2.34 prescriptions per patient. Total antibiotic utilization in terms of defined daily dose per 100 bed-days was 49.5. Piperacillin/tazobactam (45.2%) was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic, and meropenem was the most expensive antibiotics (US$4440.70). The median (interquartile range) cost of antibiotics used per patient was US$47.67 (US$63.73). Escherichia coli, Acinetobacter, and Pseudomonas sp. were the common organisms isolated and were found to be resistant to some of the commonly used antibiotics. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the utilization and cost of antibiotics are high in medical intensive care unit of the hospital and E. coli was resistant to multiple antibiotics. The findings highlight an urgent need for the implementation of antibiotic stewardship program in order to improve antibiotic utilization in such hospital settings.

Home medicines reviews: a national survey of Australian accredited pharmacists’ health service time investment

Background: In Australia, polypharmacy and medication-related problems are prevalent in the community. Therefore, medicines safety initiatives such as the Home Medicines Review (HMR) service are critical to health care provision. While the evidence continues to expand around HMR service, little is known of accredited pharmacists’ experiences of HMR time investment. Objective: This study aimed to explore accredited pharmacists’ experiences of HMR practice regarding time investment in the study’s defined HMR Stages: 1 (initial paper-based assessment and review), 2 (in-home patient-accredited pharmacist consultation), and 3 (HMR report collation, generation, completion, and provision to the patient’s General Practitioner, including any liaison time). Methods: An electronic survey was developed and piloted by a panel of reviewers. Convenience sampling was used to distribute the final anonymous survey nationally via professional pharmacy organisations. Data were analyzed for frequency distributions and a chi-square test of independence was performed to evaluate any association between demographic variables relating to HMR time investment. Results: There was a total of 255 survey respondents, representing approximately 10% of national accredited pharmacist membership. The majority were experienced accredited pharmacists who had completed >100 HMRs (73%), were female (71%), and aged >40 years (60%). Regarding time investment for a typical instance of HMR, most spent: <30 minutes performing Stage 1 (46.7%), and 30-60 minutes performing Stage 2 (70.2%). In Stage 3, 40.0% invested 1-2 hours, and 27.1% invested 2-3 hours in HMR report collation and completion. Quantitative analysis revealed statistically significant (p=0.03) gender findings where females performed longer patient consultations than males (Stage 2) (AU)

Home medicines reviews: a national survey of Australian accredited pharmacists' health service time investment.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, polypharmacy and medication-related problems are prevalent in the community. Therefore, medicines safety initiatives such as the Home Medicines Review (HMR) service are critical to health care provision. While the evidence continues to expand around HMR service, little is known of accredited pharmacists' experiences of HMR time investment. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore accredited pharmacists' experiences of HMR practice regarding time investment in the study's defined HMR Stages: 1 (initial paper-based assessment and review), 2 (in-home patient-accredited pharmacist consultation), and 3 (HMR report collation, generation, completion, and provision to the patient's General Practitioner, including any liaison time). METHODS: An electronic survey was developed and piloted by a panel of reviewers. Convenience sampling was used to distribute the final anonymous survey nationally via professional pharmacy organisations. Data were analyzed for frequency distributions and a chi-square test of independence was performed to evaluate any association between demographic variables relating to HMR time investment. RESULTS: There was a total of 255 survey respondents, representing approximately 10% of national accredited pharmacist membership. The majority were experienced accredited pharmacists who had completed >100 HMRs (73%), were female (71%), and aged >40 years (60%). Regarding time investment for a typical instance of HMR, most spent: <30 minutes performing Stage 1 (46.7%), and 30-60 minutes performing Stage 2 (70.2%). In Stage 3, 40.0% invested 1-2 hours, and 27.1% invested 2-3 hours in HMR report collation and completion. Quantitative analysis revealed statistically significant (p=0.03) gender findings where females performed longer patient consultations than males (Stage 2). More HMR career experience resulted in statistically significant (p=0.01) less time performing Stage 1 (initial paper-based assessment and review); with a trend to less time performing Stage 3 (HMR report writing). CONCLUSIONS: Accredited pharmacists invest significant time in performing comprehensive HMRs, especially during in-home patient consultations and during HMR report collation and completion. Their significant HMR time investment as medicines experts provides insight for program and workforce considerations and warrants further research to better understand their work processes for optimizing medicines use and improving health.

Attitudes of ambulatory care older Nepalese patients towards deprescribing and predictors of their willingness to deprescribe.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults continue to receive potentially inappropriate medications necessitating the need for medication optimization, by deprescribing. To ensure a holistic approach to deprescribing, it is essential to understand the perception of older adults towards deprescribing. This study aimed to assess the attitude of older ambulatory patients towards deprescribing and to identify factors predicting their willingness to deprescribe. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in central Nepal between March and September 2019 among 385 older ambulatory care patients (aged ⩾65 years) who were taking at least one regular medicine. The perception of patients towards deprescribing was assessed using the revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire via a face-to-face interview method. Descriptive statistics were performed to describe patients' characteristics and their attitudes towards deprescribing. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine predictors of the willingness of older ambulatory patients towards deprescribing. RESULTS: The median [interquartile range (IQR)] age of patients was 72 (8) years. Nearly three in five patients (64.9%) had hypertension, with 11.2% having polypharmacy. More than half of the patients (57.4%) would be willing to stop one or more of their regular medicines if their doctor said it was possible to do so. Regression analysis showed that age [odds ratio (OR) 0.946; 95% CI 0.913, 0.981; p = 0.003] and concerns about stopping medicine score (OR 0.541; 95% CI 0.334, 0.876; p = 0.013) were predictors of the willingness of the older patients towards deprescribing. CONCLUSION: One in two older ambulatory care patients in Nepal would be willing to have one or more of their medicines deprescribed. The factors predicting their willingness to deprescribe are their age and concerns about stopping medicines. Clinicians should consider discussing the possibility of deprescribing with older patients for the prevention of potential medication-related harms. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: What do older Nepalese patients think about withdrawal or dose reduction of an inappropriate medication?Introduction: Research suggests that older adults (aged ⩾65 years) continue to receive medications that have the potential for harm rather than a benefit. This necessitates the need for withdrawal or dose reduction of such inappropriate medications, the process known as deprescribing. Understanding what older patients think about this process could be a stepping-stone to the general approach for its implementation. Data on deprescribing is lacking from Nepal. Therefore, we designed a survey to explore the attitude of older patients towards deprescribing and factors that could predict their willingness to deprescribe.Methods: This study was conducted between March to September 2019 among 385 older patients who were taking at least one regular medicine and were visiting selected hospitals of Nepal for outpatient services. We performed a face-to-face interview to assess the attitude of patients towards deprescribing using a validated tool called revised Patients' Attitudes Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire that quantified the response through scoring. The data were subjected to statistical analysis to determine the attitudes of Nepalese older patients towards deprescribing and to develop a model to predict their willingness to deprescribe.Results: The average age of the participant was 72 years with 65% having hypertension and 11% using more than five medications. Our data suggested that one in two older Nepalese patients would be willing to stop one or more of their regular medications if their doctors said it was possible to do so. Their willingness to deprescribe could be predicted from their age and concerns about stopping medications.Conclusion: Clinicians should consider discussing the possibility of deprescribing with older patients for the prevention of potential medication-related harms.

Deprescribing tool for use in older Australians with life-limiting illnesses and limited life expectancy: a modified-Delphi study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Making a meaningful decision on deprescribing of potentially inappropriate medications in older adults with life-limiting illnesses (LLIs) and limited life expectancy (LLE) is often challenging. Therefore, we aimed to elicit opinion and gain consensus on a deprescribing tool for use in this population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A modified-Delphi method will be used to obtain a consensus from a panel of experts in geriatric therapeutics on a deprescribing tool for use in people aged ≥65 years with LLIs and LLE. Through an online survey, in the initial round, the panel will anonymously elicit their opinion on a series of items related to the conceptual model of the deprescribing tool, its practicality and deprescribing of medications, while on the controlled feedback in subsequent rounds till a consensus is reached or the panellists stop revising their answers. In each round, panel members will be using a 5-point Likert scale to rate their agreement with the statement. Consensus will be considered on ≥75% of agreement on the statements. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All the participants will receive an invitation and participant information but they need to consent for the participation. Ethics approval has been granted from the University of Queensland Health and Behavioural Sciences, Low and Negligible Risk Ethics Sub-Committee (reference: 2020001069). The results of this project will be disseminated through conferences and a peer-reviewed clinical journal.

Unleashing Our Potential- Pharmacists' Role in Vaccination and Public Health.

One of the greatest innovations in health care has been the development of vaccines and immunization programs that have significantly minimized the morbidity and mortality resulting from vaccine preventable diseases. While vaccines were traditionally used against infectious diseases, recent advances in technology have led to the development of vaccines for noncommunicable diseases and chronic conditions. Vaccinations are considered the most cost-effective intervention in public health that has the potential to save millions of lives every year. Despite the availability and effectiveness of vaccines for many diseases, immunization programs, and service uptake remain underused in many countries. This is mainly because of the lack of easy access to vaccinations, risk-benefit perceptions, false beliefs, and concerns about the side effects. Vaccine hesitancy-the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate, is listed as one of the top 10 threats to global health.

Outcomes of deprescribing interventions in older patients with life-limiting illness and limited life expectancy: A systematic review.

AIMS: Older patients with life-limiting illness (LLI) and limited life expectancy (LLE) continue to receive potentially inappropriate medicines, consequently deprescribing is often necessary. However, deprescribing in this population can be complex and challenging. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the evidence for outcomes of deprescribing interventions in older patients with LLI and LLE. METHODS: Studies on deprescribing intervention and their outcomes in age ≥65 years with LLI and LLE were searched using PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and Google Scholar. Medication appropriateness was primary outcome, while clinical and cost-related outcomes were secondary. Eligibility, data extraction and quality assessment were followed by a narrative synthesis of data. RESULTS: Of 9 studies (1375 participants), 3 reported on primary outcome. One study showed a significant reduction in medication inappropriateness by 34.9% (P < .001) from admission to close-out, the second achieved 29.4% (P < .001) and 15.1% (P = .003) reduction at 12 and 24 months, respectively. The third reported that their intervention stopped (17.2%) and altered the dose (2.6%) of high-risk medications. Commonly reported clinical outcomes were mortality (n = 3), quality of life (n = 2) and falls (n = 2). Outcomes in terms of cost were reported as overall cost (n = 2), medication cost (n = 1) and health care expenditure (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that deprescribing in older patients with LLI and LLE can improve medication appropriateness, and has potential for enhancement of several clinical outcomes and cost savings, but the evidence needs to be better established.

Pharmacist role in vaccination: Evidence and challenges.

Vaccines prevent an estimated 2.5 million deaths worldwide each year and are amongst the most cost-effective preventive measures against infectious diseases. Despite the effectiveness and availability of vaccines in many parts of the world, vaccination rates and service uptake remains suboptimal among both healthcare providers and the public. Pharmacists as established advocates, educators as well as qualified providers of vaccinations have a significant role to play in promoting and supporting the uptake of vaccination. Challenges and barriers to pharmacist vaccination are multifactorial, which needs effective strategies to address. Overcoming these barriers will increase the role of pharmacists as vaccinators that ultimately increases public access to vaccination and accurate and reliable information about vaccines.