RESUMO
BACKGROUND: MyDispense is a free online virtual simulation software developed by Monash University. The software facilitates students to practise, apply and hone the skills of a pharmacist in a realistic environment without the potentially life-threatening consequences of a real-life error. Although the focus of MyDispense was initially on exposure to community pharmacy practice scenarios, its modular build and customizability, indicate that there are a wide range of applications that could be incorporated into pharmacy education. Therefore, this study reviews and appraises the literature on the use of MyDispense within pharmacy education. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted. The electronic databases (CINAHL, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Google Scholar, and Scopus) were searched to identify scholarly articles related to MyDispense in pharmacy education from January 2011 and August 2022. RESULTS: Forty-three papers met the inclusion criteria and were analysed in this scoping review. A total of 418 key sentences and segments of text were extracted from the papers and subsequently categorized into 10 subthemes. The 10 subthemes were dispensing skills, communication skills, decision-making/problem-solving skills, student performance, pharmacy law, applying theoretical knowledge, support educators, pharmacy practice, feedback/reflection and practice in a risk-free environment. In total, four overarching themes summarize how MyDispense is supporting pharmacy education: supporting education; skill development; application of knowledge and student outcomes. CONCLUSION: The scoping review found that MyDispense was mostly used to support education and student skill development. These findings can be used to support pharmacy educators globally on the various uses and applications of MyDispense in their teaching.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Evidence on OAB management remains suboptimal and methodological limitations in randomized control trials (RCTs) affect their comparability. High quality meta-analyses are lacking. This study aimed to compare selection and reporting of outcomes and outcome measures across RCTs as well as evaluate methodological quality and outcome reporting quality as a first stage in the process of developing core outcome sets (COS). METHODS: RCTs were searched using Pubmed, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane, ICTRP and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception to January 2020, in English language, on adult women. Pharmacological management, interventions, sample size, journal type and commercial funding were documented. Methodological and outcome reporting quality were evaluated using JADAD and MOMENT scores. RESULTS: Thirty-eight trials (18,316 women) were included. Sixty-nine outcomes were reported, using 62 outcome measures. The most commonly reported outcome domains were efficacy (86.8%), safety (73.7%) and QoL (60.5%). The most commonly reported outcomes in each domain were urgency urinary incontinence episodes (UUI) (52.6%), antimuscarinic side effects (76.3%) and change in validated questionnaire scores (36.8%). A statistically significant correlation was found between JADAD and MOMENT (Spearman's rho = 0.548, p < 0.05) scores. This indicates that higher methodological quality is associated with higher outcome reporting quality. CONCLUSIONS: Development of COS and core outcome measure sets will address variations and lead to higher quality evidence. We recommend the most commonly reported outcomes in each domain, as interim COS. For efficacy we recommend: UUI episodes, urgency and nocturia episodes; for safety: antimuscarinic adverse events, other adverse events and discontinuation rates; for QoL: OAB-q, PPBC and IIQ scores.
