Evaluation of guideline implementation for dispensing driving-impairing medicines by National Pharmacy Organizations.

Background: In 2004, the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) adopted a Statement of Professional Standard on the supply of medicines affecting driving performance, transformed to FIP guidelines in 2014. In 2011, the final report from the European initiative on Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines (DRUID) was published. Both documents provided recommendations for improving dispensing guidelines for driving-impairing medicines for patients who use psychoactive medicines. Objective: This study investigated the extent that European professional organizations of pharmacists (POPs) implemented existing guidelines and DRUID results. Methods: An online questionnaire survey was conducted in April-May 2022. Questionnaires were sent by e-mail to POPs in 46 European countries. The questionnaire addressed the following topics: awareness of FIP guidelines and DRUID outcomes (a), development of dispensing guidelines (b), target groups for information materials (c), evaluations of dispensing practices (d), examples of projects on medicines affecting driving fitness (e), development of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) -support (f), collaboration with organizations of physicians (g), and patients (h). The data were analyzed by indicating implementation initiatives in different countries. Open-ended questions were assessed qualitatively. Results: POPs in 23 European countries responded to the invitation (response rate: 50%). Guidelines for improving dispensing practices were available in 5 countries targeted at professionals, patients, and the general population. Patient and physician organizations were involved in 4 and 3 countries, respectively. Implementation was supported by computerized dispensing systems (5 countries) and public campaigns (5 countries). Conclusions: Twenty years after the introduction of FIP guidelines and ten years after the DRUID outcomes, only 5 European POPs have implemented this knowledge. Different activities were performed to support implementation, resulting in examples of successful use of recommendations for driving-impairing medicines in pharmacy practice. Implementation needs further attention. The successful practices that have been developed are an example for dissemination to other countries.

Evaluation of medication-related problems in liver transplant recipients with and without an outpatient medication consultation by a clinical pharmacist: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Transplant recipients undergo significant changes in their medication regimen during follow-up and are at an increased risk for medication-related problems (MRPs). AIM: This study aimed to compare the prevalence and types of MRPs and interventions in liver transplant recipients with and without an outpatient medication consultation by a clinical pharmacist as well as the satisfaction with information about medicines and medication adherence. METHOD: We performed a single-center, observational cohort study. A retro- and prospective cohort were used and subdivided in a group that did and did not receive a medication consultation. The prevalence and types of MRPs and interventions were identified and categorized. The satisfaction parameters were evaluated using validated questionnaires. RESULTS: Included were 291 patients. In total, 368 MRPs were identified in 197 patients in the non-medication consultation cohort (median 1; range 1-3 per patient) and 248 MRPs in 94 patients in the medication consultation cohort (median 2; range 1-4 per patient). In the medication consultation cohort, significantly fewer MRPs as unnecessary drugs (17.3% versus 58.7%, p < 0.001), suboptimal therapy (2.4% versus 9.5%, p < 0.001), untreated indication (2.8% versus 6.8%, p = 0.040) and underdosed drugs (0.4% versus 6.3%, p < 0.001) were identified. In the non-medication consultation cohort significantly more patients used unnecessary drugs (72.1% versus 39.4%, p < 0.001) compared to the medication consultation cohort. Patients in both cohorts are satisfied with the information about medicines and reported a high medication adherence. CONCLUSION: Patients in the medication consultation cohort had significantly fewer MRPs and used significantly less unnecessary drugs. Including a clinical pharmacist to the post-transplant care has an added value.

Nature and frequency of prescription modifications in community pharmacies: A nationwide study in the Netherlands.

AIMS: To investigate the nature and frequency of prescription modifications in Dutch community pharmacies. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, Dutch community pharmacists documented prescription modifications in their pharmacy during 1 predetermined day. Pharmacists from all Dutch community pharmacies were invited to participate. A prescription modification was defined as any modification in a prescription for a medicine or other healthcare product because of an administrative problem, logistic issue or potential drug-related problem (DRP). All documented modifications were assessed to establish the nature and frequency of prescription modifications. RESULTS: Pharmacists in 275 pharmacies completed the study. A modification was performed in 5.5% of all prescriptions. 1.3% of the prescriptions contained an administrative problem, of which insufficient specification of the dosing regimen was most common (63.1%). A modification was performed due to a logistic issue in 2.4% of the prescriptions. The most frequently recorded issues were unavailability of medication (40.9%) and obligatory product substitutions due to reimbursement policies (33.2%). A modification was performed in 1.8% of the prescriptions to solve or prevent potential DRPs. Of these, 69.2% was potentially clinically relevant according to the pharmacist concerned. The most frequently prevented potential DRP was an incorrect strength or dose (31.9%). CONCLUSION: Dutch community pharmacists modified almost 1 in 20 prescriptions per pharmacy. The nature of the modifications reflects current community pharmacy practice, in which pharmacists frequently deal with logistic issues and intervene to solve or prevent for DRPs several times a day. The majority of the DRPs were considered to be potentially clinically relevant.

[Safe prescribing in patients with liver cirrhosis; 5 pitfalls]. / Veilig voorschrijven bij levercirrose: 5 misvattingen.

The liver has a major role in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medicines and hepatic impairment could therefore lead to increased plasma levels and adverse drug reactions. Due to the large overcapacity of the liver, medication adjustments are only needed when a chronic liver disease has progressed to cirrhosis. Important pharmacokinetic alterations that could occur in cirrhosis are: (a) a decreased first-pass effect, (b) impaired metabolism by liver enzymes, and (c) in an advanced stage also impairment of renal elimination. Patients with cirrhosis could also be more sensitive to certain adverse drug reactions at normal drug levels, such as renal impairment due to NSAIDs or the sedative effect of morphinomimetics and psychotropic drugs. Prescribing in patients with cirrhosis is complex, which we illustrate by 5 common pitfalls. In practice, healthcare professionals could use a website with guidance for prescribing almost 300 medicines (www.geneesmiddelenbijlevercirrose.nl).

[Hypersensitivity reactions and vaccines]. / Overgevoeligheidsreacties en vaccins.

- A lot of questions are being asked in the Netherlands about the safety of vaccination. More knowledge among care providers helps with regard to good medical practice and information.- Severe hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines are rare. Chicken-egg protein, gelatine and thiomersal are the most important vaccine components that may provoke severe reactions.- Acute treatment of patients with severe hypersensitivity reactions consists of intramuscular adrenaline.- In case of a severe reaction to a vaccine or a vaccine component, the subsequent course of action is determined by the physician referred to: the allergist or paediatric allergist. For most patients, vaccination or revaccination is possible in a setting where acute treatment is possible.- Slight side effects and delayed hypersensitivity reactions are not good reasons for additional measures with respect to vaccination.- It is important to record hypersensitivity reactions completely and unambiguously in the patient file.

Medication review and patient counselling at discharge from the hospital by community pharmacists.

AIMS: In 2001, the Association of Amsterdam Community Pharmacists adopted a programme to improve the pharmaceutical care of patients who were discharged from hospital with five or more drug prescriptions. A comprehensive protocol for pharmaceutical care at discharge (IBOM-1) was developed. The aim of the study was to evaluate the initial IBOM protocol and to study the effects of the protocol on drug therapy and patient satisfaction as well as on drug use compliance and mortality. METHOD: A controlled intervention study involving 37 community pharmacies and 715 of their registered patients who were discharged from a hospital and using at least five prescribed drugs in the years 2001-2003. The intervention included an extensive medication review and drug counselling at the patient's home. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Pharmacy intervention activities, changes in medication, discontinuation of drugs prescribed at discharge, mortality, time spent on the intervention activities, and medication cost savings were all evaluated. Patient satisfaction was measured by means of a questionnaire. RESULTS: 379 and 336 patients were enrolled in the intervention and control groups, respectively. The mean number of drugs per patient not dispensed, concomitantly dispensed, or of which the quantity was changed was higher in the intervention group than in the control group (0.70 +/- 1.74 vs. 0.40 +/- 1.43, 0.11 +/- 0.40 vs. 0.038 +/- 0.26, and 0.29 +/- 1.05 vs. 0.097 +/- 0.52, respectively). The mean number of drugs for which the dose or dosage form was changed was similar in both groups. Substitution of brand for generic or vice versa was greater in the intervention group. Changes resulting from a PAIS signal were similar in both groups. The mean number of drugs per patient for which contact was required with the physician or the Pharmacy Hospital Service Desk was higher in the intervention group (0.35 +/- 0.51 vs. 0.16 +/- 0.38). About 40% of home visits resulted in the clearing of redundant drug supplies. The IBOM-1 intervention did not influence discontinuation of drugs prescribed at discharge, nor did it influence mortality. Medication costs were slightly reduced. More patients of intervention pharmacies than of control pharmacies indicated that they were (very) satisfied with the drug counselling by their community pharmacist upon delivery of their discharge medication (87% vs. 50%; chi(2) < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Structured pharmaceutical care according to the IBOM-1 protocol led to more changes in drug therapy. Home visits resulted in the clearing of redundant home drug supplies. In addition, patients were highly satisfied with the counselling at discharge from hospital by their community pharmacist. Patient counselling at discharge from hospital by pharmacists, therefore, appears to be a meaningful pharmaceutical care activity.