Search

Background: In recent years, community pharmacists have seen their profession transition from a dispensing-focused role to a rapidly evolving clinically oriented practice. In Québec, Bill 31, adopted in 2020, increased the clinical opportunities for pharmacists with independent prescribing privileges in various defined clinical situations. As this expanded role can lead to different barriers, it is crucial to explore pharmacists' comfort levels with implementing such changes in their practice., Methods: A web-based survey was conducted from March 25 to May 28, 2021, among community pharmacists in Québec. We collected data with a questionnaire developed for this study. Questions were grouped into 4 domains: (1) characteristics of the respondents; (2) workload and work setting; (3) comfort level with, and barriers to, adjusting medications and following up pharmacologic treatments (86 clinical situations evaluated); and (4) general barriers and facilitators to implementation., Results: A total of 146 community pharmacists completed the questionnaire. Most were women (71.9%), younger than 50 years of age (86.2%), had a bachelor's degree (64.4%) as their highest academic level and had more than 10 years of experience as pharmacists (56.8%). Most of them worked exclusively in a community pharmacy (86.3%). Among the 86 clinical situations evaluated, there were 16 in which at least 80% of respondents felt comfortable. The main barriers identified were a lack of knowledge, experience and dedicated time and difficulties integrating these activities into the workflow; facilitators were having an adequate environment and resources., Conclusion: This study shows community pharmacists can confidently adjust pharmacotherapy for several conditions. However, they must have adequate time and resources. Also, the more complex the clinical situations were, the less comfortable community pharmacists felt adjusting pharmacotherapy. This study identified several areas where continuing education, training and mentoring could be offered and where the work environment and organization could be improved., Competing Interests: The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest concerning the research, authorship and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Objective: To provide a summary of the noteworthy medical articles published in 2023 that are relevant to family physicians., Selecting the Evidence: Articles were chosen and ranked by the PEER (Patients, Experience, Evidence, Research) team, a group of primary care health professionals focused on evidence-based medicine. The selection process involved routine surveillance of tables of contents in high-impact medical journals and continuous monitoring of EvidenceAlerts. Articles were prioritized based on their direct applicability to and potential to influence primary care practice., Main Message: Selected articles addressed various clinical areas of primary care. The topics included a comparison of a treat-to-target approach versus a high-intensity statins prescription for lipid management; semaglutide and its impact on cardiovascular outcomes; respiratory syncytial virus vaccine for older adults; chlorthalidone versus hydrochlorothiazide in preventing cardiovascular events; amitriptyline for irritable bowel syndrome; the role of opioids in acute back pain; safety of oral penicillin challenges in patients allergic to penicillin; spironolactone for facial acne; strategies to reverse frailty in older adults; and identifying the provider of chronic disease management. Two "up and coming" medications are also mentioned: retatrutide for weight loss and fezolinetant for vasomotor symptoms of menopause., Conclusion: Research published in 2023 yielded several high-quality articles with topics relevant to primary care, including cardiovascular care, irritable bowel syndrome, care of the elderly, and acne management., (Copyright © 2024 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To update the 2015 clinical practice guideline and provide a simplified approach to lipid management in the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) for primary care., Methods: Following the Institute of Medicine's Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust , a multidisciplinary, pan-Canadian guideline panel was formed. This panel was represented by primary care providers, free from conflicts of interest with industry, and included the patient perspective. A separate scientific evidence team performed evidence reviews on statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors, fibrates, bile acid sequestrants, niacin, and omega-3 supplements (docosahexaenoic acid with eicosapentaenoic acid [EPA] or EPA ethyl ester alone [icosapent]), as well as on 11 supplemental questions. Recommendations were finalized by the guideline panel through use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology., Recommendations: All recommendations are presented in a patient-centred manner designed with the needs of family physicians and other primary care providers in mind. Many recommendations are similar to those published in 2015. Statins remain first-line therapy for both primary and secondary CVD prevention, and the Mediterranean diet and physical activity are recommended to reduce cardiovascular risk (primary and secondary prevention). The guideline panel recommended against using lipoprotein a, apolipoprotein B, or coronary artery calcium levels when assessing cardiovascular risk, and recommended against targeting specific lipid levels. The team also reviewed new evidence pertaining to omega-3 fatty acids (including EPA ethyl ester [icosapent]) and proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitors, and outlined when to engage in informed shared decision making with patients on interventions to lower cardiovascular risk., Conclusion: These updated evidence-based guidelines provide a simplified approach to lipid management for the prevention and management of CVD. These guidelines were created by and for primary health care professionals and their patients., (Copyright © 2023 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To assess the benefits and harms of lipid-lowering therapies used to prevent or manage cardiovascular disease including bile acid sequestrants (BAS), ezetimibe, fibrates, niacin, omega-3 supplements, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, and statins., Data Sources: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and a grey literature search., Study Selection: Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials published between January 2017 and March 2022 looking at statins, ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, fibrates, BAS, niacin, and omega-3 supplements for preventing cardiovascular outcomes were selected. Outcomes of interest included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, and adverse events., Synthesis: A total of 76 systematic reviews were included. Four randomized controlled trials were also included for BAS because no efficacy systematic review was identified. Statins significantly reduced MACE (6 systematic reviews; median risk ratio [RR]=0.74; interquartile range [IQR]=0.71 to 0.76), cardiovascular mortality (7 systematic reviews; median RR=0.85, IQR=0.83 to 0.86), and all-cause mortality (8 systematic reviews; median RR=0.91, IQR=0.88 to 0.92). Major adverse cardiovascular events were also significantly reduced by ezetimibe (3 systematic reviews; median RR=0.93, IQR=0.93 to 0.94), PCSK9 inhibitors (14 systematic reviews; median RR=0.84, IQR=0.83 to 0.87), and fibrates (2 systematic reviews; mean RR=0.86), but these interventions had no effect on cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Fibrates had no effect on any cardiovascular outcomes when added to a statin. Omega-3 combination supplements had no effect on MACE or all-cause mortality but significantly reduced cardiovascular mortality (5 systematic reviews; median RR=0.93, IQR=0.93 to 0.94). Eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester alone significantly reduced MACE (1 systematic review, RR=0.78) and cardiovascular mortality (2 systematic reviews; RRs of 0.82 and 0.82). In primary cardiovascular prevention, only statins showed consistent benefits on MACE (6 systematic reviews; median RR=0.75, IQR=0.73 to 0.78), cardiovascularall-cause mortality (7 systematic reviews, median RR=0.83, IQR=0.81 to 0.90), and all-cause mortality (8 systematic reviews; median RR=0.91, IQR=0.87 to 0.91)., Conclusion: Statins have the most consistent evidence for the prevention of cardiovascular complications with a relative risk reduction of about 25% for MACE and 10% to 15% for mortality. The addition of ezetimibe, a PCSK9 inhibitor, or eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester to a statin provides additional MACE risk reduction but has no effect on all-cause mortality., (Copyright © 2023 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To summarize 10 high-quality studies or guidelines from 2021 that have strong relevance to physicians in comprehensive family practice., Selecting the Evidence: Routine literature surveillance of abstracts in high-impact journals and EvidenceAlerts was completed by the PEER (Patients, Experience, Evidence, Research) team, a group of health care professionals with a research interest in evidence-based medicine and primary care. Abstracts were screened, selected, and ranked by the PEER team., Main Message: The articles from 2021 that are most likely to impact primary care practice discuss the following topics: empagliflozin for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; semaglutide for weight loss; stopping antidepressants in primary care; inhaled budesonide for COVID-19; acetylsalicylic acid for preeclampsia prevention; quarter-dose blood pressure medications for hypertension; aggressive blood pressure control for elderly patients; kangaroo care for low-birth-weight infants; footwear for knee osteoarthritis; and delayed antibiotics for pediatric respiratory infections. Two "honourable mention" studies are also briefly reviewed., Conclusion: Research from 2021 produced several high-quality studies in cardiovascular care but also addressed a variety of conditions relevant to primary care including weight loss, depression, and COVID-19., (Copyright © 2022 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To develop a clinical practice guideline to support the management of chronic pain, including low back, osteoarthritic, and neuropathic pain in primary care., Methods: The guideline was developed with an emphasis on best available evidence and shared decision-making principles. Ten health professionals (4 generalist family physicians, 1 pain management-focused family physician, 1 anesthesiologist, 1 physical therapist, 1 pharmacist, 1 nurse practitioner, and 1 psychologist), a patient representative, and a nonvoting pharmacist and guideline methodologist comprised the Guideline Committee. Member selection was based on profession, practice setting, and lack of financial conflicts of interest. The guideline process was iterative in identification of key questions, evidence review, and development of guideline recommendations. Three systematic reviews, including a total of 285 randomized controlled trials, were completed. Randomized controlled trials were included only if they reported a responder analysis (eg, how many patients achieved a 30% or greater reduction in pain). The committee directed an Evidence Team (composed of evidence experts) to address an additional 11 complementary questions. Key recommendations were derived through committee consensus. The guideline and shared decision-making tools underwent extensive review by clinicians and patients before publication., Recommendations: Physical activity is recommended as the foundation for managing osteoarthritis and chronic low back pain; evidence of benefit is unclear for neuropathic pain. Cognitive-behavioural therapy or mindfulness-based stress reduction are also suggested as options for managing chronic pain. Treatments for which there is clear, unclear, or no benefit are outlined for each condition. Treatments for which harms likely outweigh benefits for all or most conditions studied include opioids and cannabinoids., Conclusion: This guideline for the management of chronic pain, including osteoarthritis, low back pain, and neuropathic pain, highlights best available evidence including both benefits and harms for a number of treatment interventions. A strong recommendation for exercise as the primary treatment for chronic osteoarthritic and low back pain is made based on demonstrated long-term evidence of benefit. This information is intended to assist with, not dictate, shared decision making with patients., (Copyright© 2022 the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Background: In 2018, a virtual community of practice (CoP) for pharmacists working in family medicine groups (FMGs) in Quebec province was developed. The aim of this CoP-called Réseau Québécois des Pharmaciens GMF (RQP GMF)-was to foster best practices by supporting FMG pharmacists. This study assesses the processes and outcomes of this CoP 2 years after its creation., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional web-based study from March to May 2020. All FMG pharmacists who were registered as members of the RQP GMF ( n = 326) were sent an invitation via a newsletter. The link to the questionnaire was also publicized in the CoP Facebook group. The questionnaire comprised a 38-item validated instrument assessing 8 dimensions of the CoP. A descriptive analysis was performed., Results: A total of 112 FMG pharmacists (34.4%) completed the questionnaire. Respondents agreed that the RQP GMF was a joint enterprise (mean score, 4.18/5), that members shared their knowledge (mean score, 3.94/5) and engaged mutually (mean score, 3.50/5) and that the RQP GMF provided support (mean score, 3.92/5) and capacity building (mean score, 4.01/5). In general, they were satisfied with the implementation process (mean score, 3.68/5) and with activities proposed (mean score, 3.79/5). A lower proportion of respondents agreed that their participation in the RQP GMF generated external impacts, which led to a smaller mean score (3.37/5) for this dimension., Conclusion: The RQP GMF, one of the first communities of practice for pharmacists practising in family medicine groups, attained most of the objectives initially intended by the CoP. These results will facilitate the adaptation of processes and activities to better fulfil members' needs. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2021;154:xx-xx., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflicts to declare., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: In recent years, there has been growing interest in studying asthma treatment escalation patterns in the real-world setting, particularly with the advent of expensive biologic therapies. Healthcare administrative claims databases can be used to study treatment escalation patterns at a population-level; however, the reported definitions for claims-based asthma treatment escalation are highly variable in the literature., Objective: The aim of this study was to develop an operational definition of treatment escalation in adults with asthma that can be applied to healthcare administrative data., Methods: A mixed-methods research design incorporating the Delphi process was used to establish an expert consensus for this definition. A multi-disciplinary expert panel participated in three iterative rounds of online questionnaires covering treatment escalation criteria inspired by a systematic review, which was conducted as part of this study. The final definition was constructed using criteria for which a 75% level of agreement was achieved among the experts., Results: We developed a claims-based treatment escalation definition that was adapted from the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) strategy. The definition comprised seven treatment steps, as well as escalation options for treatments that are not typically included in clinical guidelines. The definition also incorporated methods to identify treatments in severe asthma, such as oral corticosteroid maintenance therapy and chronic azithromycin use., Conclusions: The operational definition of treatment escalation developed in this study bridges the gap between clinical guidelines and real-world clinical practice and lays the groundwork for future observational studies on treatment escalation patterns among patients with asthma., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To determine the proportion of patients with neuropathic pain who achieve a clinically meaningful improvement in their pain with the use of different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and a gray literature search., Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials that reported a responder analysis of adults with neuropathic pain-specifically diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, or trigeminal neuralgia-treated with any of the following 8 treatments: exercise, acupuncture, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), topical rubefacients, opioids, anticonvulsant medications, and topical lidocaine., Synthesis: A total of 67 randomized controlled trials were included. There was moderate certainty of evidence that anticonvulsant medications (risk ratio of 1.54; 95% CI 1.45 to 1.63; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7) and SNRIs (risk ratio of 1.45; 95% CI 1.33 to 1.59; NNT = 7) might provide a clinically meaningful benefit to patients with neuropathic pain. There was low certainty of evidence for a clinically meaningful benefit for rubefacients (ie, capsaicin; NNT = 7) and opioids (NNT = 8), and very low certainty of evidence for TCAs. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that acupuncture was ineffective. All drug classes, except TCAs, had a greater likelihood of deriving a clinically meaningful benefit than having withdrawals due to adverse events (number needed to harm between 12 and 15). No trials met the inclusion criteria for exercise or lidocaine, nor were any trials identified for trigeminal neuralgia., Conclusion: There is moderate certainty of evidence that anticonvulsant medications and SNRIs provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain in those with neuropathic pain, with lower certainty of evidence for rubefacients and opioids, and very low certainty of evidence for TCAs. Owing to low-quality evidence for many interventions, future high-quality trials that report responder analyses will be important to strengthen understanding of the relative benefits and harms of treatments in patients with neuropathic pain., (Copyright © the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

In the SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) cluster-randomized controlled trial, we investigated the impact of a structured medication regimen simplification intervention on medication incidents in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) over a 12-month follow-up. A clinical pharmacist applied the validated 5-step Medication Regimen Simplification Guide for Residential Aged CarE (MRS GRACE) for 96 of the 99 participating residents in the four intervention RACFs. The 143 participating residents in the comparison RACFs received usual care. Over 12 months, medication incident rates were 95 and 66 per 100 resident-years in the intervention and comparison groups, respectively (adjusted incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-2.38). The 12-month pre/post incident rate almost halved among participants in the intervention group (adjusted IRR 0.56; 95%CI 0.38-0.80). A significant reduction in 12-month pre/post incident rate was also observed in the comparison group (adjusted IRR 0.67, 95%CI 0.50-0.90). Medication incidents over 12 months were often minor in severity. Declines in 12-month pre/post incident rates were observed in both study arms; however, rates were not significantly different among residents who received and did not receive a one-off structured medication regimen simplification intervention.

Objective: To determine the proportion of chronic low back pain patients who achieve a clinically meaningful response from different pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and gray literature search., Study Selection: Published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported a responder analysis of adults with chronic low back pain treated with any of the following 15 interventions: oral or topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), exercise, acupuncture, spinal manipulation therapy, corticosteroid injections, acetaminophen, oral opioids, anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, cannabinoids, oral muscle relaxants, or topical rubefacients., Synthesis: A total of 63 RCTs were included. There was moderate certainty that exercise (risk ratio [RR] of 1.71; 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; number needed to treat [NNT] of 7), oral NSAIDs (RR = 1.44; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.78; NNT = 6), and SNRIs (duloxetine; RR = 1.25; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.38; NNT = 10) provide clinically meaningful benefits to patients with chronic low back pain. Exercise was the only intervention with sustained benefit (up to 48 weeks). There was low certainty that spinal manipulation therapy and topical rubefacients benefit patients. The benefit of acupuncture disappeared in higher-quality, longer (> 4 weeks) trials. Very low-quality evidence demonstrated that corticosteroid injections are ineffective. Patients treated with opioids had a greater likelihood of discontinuing treatment owing to an adverse event (number needed to harm of 5) than continuing treatment to derive any clinically meaningful benefit (NNT = 16), while those treated with SNRIs (duloxetine) had a similar likelihood of continuing treatment to attain benefit (NNT = 10) as those discontinuing the medication owing to an adverse event (number need to harm of 11). One trial each of anticonvulsants and topical NSAIDs found similar benefit to that of placebo. No RCTs of acetaminophen, cannabinoids, muscle relaxants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or tricyclic antidepressants met the inclusion criteria., Conclusion: Exercise, oral NSAIDs, and SNRIs (duloxetine) provide a clinically meaningful reduction in pain, with exercise being the only intervention that demonstrated sustained benefit after the intervention ended. Future high-quality trials that report responder analyses are required to provide a better understanding of the benefits and harms of interventions for patients with chronic low back pain., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Background: Skeletal muscle cramps are common and often occur in association with pregnancy, advanced age, exercise or motor neuron disorders (such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). Typically, such cramps have no obvious underlying pathology, and so are termed idiopathic. Magnesium supplements are marketed for the prophylaxis of cramps but the efficacy of magnesium for this purpose remains unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2012, and performed to identify and incorporate more recent studies., Objectives: To assess the effects of magnesium supplementation compared to no treatment, placebo control or other cramp therapies in people with skeletal muscle cramps.   SEARCH METHODS: On 9 September 2019, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, CINAHL Plus, AMED, and SPORTDiscus. We also searched WHO-ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov for registered trials that might be ongoing or unpublished, and ISI Web of Science for studies citing the studies included in this review., Selection Criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of magnesium supplementation (in any form) to prevent skeletal muscle cramps in any patient group (i.e. all clinical presentations of cramp). We considered comparisons of magnesium with no treatment, placebo control, or other therapy., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted data. Two review authors assessed risk of bias. We attempted to contact all study authors when questions arose and obtained participant-level data for four of the included trials, one of which was unpublished. We collected all data on adverse effects from the included RCTs., Main Results: We identified 11 trials (nine parallel-group, two cross-over) enrolling a total of 735 individuals, amongst whom 118 cross-over participants additionally served as their own controls. Five trials enrolled women with pregnancy-associated leg cramps (408 participants) and five trials enrolled people with idiopathic cramps (271 participants, with 118 additionally crossed over to control). Another study enrolled 29 people with liver cirrhosis, only some of whom suffered muscle cramps. All trials provided magnesium as an oral supplement, except for one trial which provided magnesium as a series of slow intravenous infusions. Nine trials compared magnesium to placebo, one trial compared magnesium to no treatment, calcium carbonate or vitamin B, and another trial compared magnesium to vitamin E or calcium. We judged the single trial in people with liver cirrhosis and all five trials in participants with pregnancy-associated leg cramps to be at high risk of bias. In contrast, we rated the risk of bias high in only one of five trials in participants with idiopathic rest cramps. For idiopathic cramps, largely in older adults (mean age 61.6 to 69.3 years) presumed to have nocturnal leg cramps (the commonest presentation), differences in measures of cramp frequency when comparing magnesium to placebo were small, not statistically significant, and showed minimal heterogeneity (I² = 0% to 12%). This includes the primary endpoint, percentage change from baseline in the number of cramps per week at four weeks (mean difference (MD) -9.59%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -23.14% to 3.97%; 3 studies, 177 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and the difference in the number of cramps per week at four weeks (MD -0.18 cramps/week, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.49; 5 studies, 307 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The percentage of individuals experiencing a 25% or better reduction in cramp rate from baseline was also no different (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.29; 3 studies, 177 participants; high-certainty evidence). Similarly, no statistically significant difference was found at four weeks in measures of cramp intensity or cramp duration. This includes the number of participants rating their cramps as moderate or severe at four weeks (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.21; 2 studies, 91 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); and the percentage of participants with the majority of cramp durations of one minute or more at four weeks (RR 1.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 4.53, 1 study, 46 participants; low-certainty evidence). We were unable to perform meta-analysis for trials of pregnancy-associated leg cramps. The single study comparing magnesium to no treatment failed to find statistically significant benefit on a three-point ordinal scale of overall treatment efficacy. Of the three trials comparing magnesium to placebo, one found no benefit on frequency or intensity measures, another found benefit for both, and a third reported inconsistent results for frequency that could not be reconciled. The single study in people with liver cirrhosis was small and had limited reporting of cramps, but found no difference in terms of cramp frequency or cramp intensity. Our analysis of adverse events pooled all studies, regardless of the setting in which cramps occurred. Major adverse events (occurring in 2 out of 72 magnesium recipients and 3 out of 68 placebo recipients), and withdrawals due to adverse events, were not significantly different from placebo. However, in the four studies for which it could be determined, more participants experienced minor adverse events in the magnesium group than in the placebo group (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.33; 4 studies, 254 participants; low-certainty evidence). Overall, oral magnesium was associated with mostly gastrointestinal adverse events (e.g. diarrhoea), experienced by 11% (10% in control) to 37% (14% in control) of participants., Authors' Conclusions: It is unlikely that magnesium supplementation provides clinically meaningful cramp prophylaxis to older adults experiencing skeletal muscle cramps. In contrast, for those experiencing pregnancy-associated rest cramps the literature is conflicting and further research in this population is needed. We found no RCTs evaluating magnesium for exercise-associated muscle cramps or disease-state-associated muscle cramps (for example amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease) other than a single small (inconclusive) study in people with liver cirrhosis, only some of whom suffered cramps., (Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: To determine the effect of mask use on viral respiratory infection risk., Data Sources: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library., Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in at least 1 published systematic review comparing the use of masks with a control group, either in community or health care settings, on the risk of viral respiratory infections., Synthesis: In total, 11 systematic reviews were included and 18 RCTs of 26 444 participants were found, 12 in the community and 6 in health care workers. Included studies had limitations and were deemed at high risk of bias. Overall, the use of masks in the community did not reduce the risk of influenza, confirmed viral respiratory infection, influenzalike illness, or any clinical respiratory infection. However, in the 2 trials that most closely aligned with mask use in real-life community settings, there was a significant risk reduction in influenzalike illness (risk ratio [RR] = 0.83; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.99). The use of masks in households with a sick contact was not associated with a significant infection risk reduction in any analysis, no matter if masks were used by the sick individual, the healthy family members, or both. In health care workers, surgical masks were superior to cloth masks for preventing influenzalike illness (RR = 0.12; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98), and N95 masks were likely superior to surgical masks for preventing influenzalike illness (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.00) and any clinical respiratory infections (RR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00)., Conclusion: This systematic review found limited evidence that the use of masks might reduce the risk of viral respiratory infections. In the community setting, a possible reduced risk of influenzalike illness was found among mask users. In health care workers, the results show no difference between N95 masks and surgical masks on the risk of confirmed influenza or other confirmed viral respiratory infections, although possible benefits from N95 masks were found for preventing influenzalike illness or other clinical respiratory infections. Surgical masks might be superior to cloth masks but data are limited to 1 trial., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To determine how many patients with chronic osteoarthritis pain respond to various non-surgical treatments., Data Sources: PubMed and the Cochrane Library., Study Selection: Published systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included meta-analysis of responder outcomes for at least 1 of the following interventions were included: acetaminophen, oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), topical NSAIDs, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants, cannabinoids, counseling, exercise, platelet-rich plasma, viscosupplementation, glucosamine, chondroitin, intra-articular corticosteroids, rubefacients, or opioids., Synthesis: In total, 235 systematic reviews were included. Owing to limited reporting of responder meta-analyses, a post hoc decision was made to evaluate individual RCTs with responder analysis within the included systematic reviews. New meta-analyses were performed where possible. A total of 155 RCTs were included. Interventions that led to more patients attaining meaningful pain relief compared with control included exercise (risk ratio [RR] of 2.36; 95% CI 1.79 to 3.12), intra-articular corticosteroids (RR = 1.74; 95% CI 1.15 to 2.62), SNRIs (RR = 1.53; 95% CI 1.25 to 1.87), oral NSAIDs (RR = 1.44; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.52), glucosamine (RR = 1.33; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.74), topical NSAIDs (RR = 1.27; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.38), chondroitin (RR = 1.26; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.41), viscosupplementation (RR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.12 to 1.33), and opioids (RR = 1.16; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.32). Preplanned subgroup analysis demonstrated no effect with glucosamine, chondroitin, or viscosupplementation in studies that were only publicly funded. When trials longer than 4 weeks were analyzed, the benefits of opioids were not statistically significant., Conclusion: Interventions that provide meaningful relief for chronic osteoarthritis pain might include exercise, intra-articular corticosteroids, SNRIs, oral and topical NSAIDs, glucosamine, chondroitin, viscosupplementation, and opioids. However, funding of studies and length of treatment are important considerations in interpreting these data., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

What Is Known and Objective: Pharmacists' responsibilities and practices have expanded over the years to be more clinical. Working in other settings and collaborating with other healthcare professionals can lead to new needs that are unmet by actual training. This study was performed to describe the characteristics and practices of pharmacists working in family medicine groups (FMGs) and to assess their needs to develop a practice-based network fostering best practices., Methods: A Quebec province-wide cross-sectional study was performed from May to August 2018. Pharmacists practising in FMGs were identified through phone calls to all listed FMGs and via direct emails. All identified pharmacists were emailed an invitation to complete an online questionnaire comprising questions to assess their sociodemographic characteristics, to describe their FMG and to assess their needs to reach an optimal practice. The link to the questionnaire was also publicized in a Facebook group of FMG pharmacists and by several professional organizations. A descriptive analysis was performed and discussed with two committees: a working group of FMG pharmacists and an advisory committee comprising key stakeholders., Results and Discussion: A total of 299 FMG pharmacists were identified, and 178 (59.5%) completed the online questionnaire. Most were women (71.9%), were less than 40 years old (71.9%) and also practised as community pharmacists (76.4%). Reviewing medication to optimize pharmacotherapy and answering questions related to specific issues were the most frequent activities, with 86.0% and 90.4% of pharmacists, respectively, reporting that they performed these often or very often. The most frequently mentioned needs were training and mentorship adapted to the FMG practice and improvement in the understanding that other healthcare professionals have about the role of the FMG pharmacist. Performing comprehensive medication assessments and developing thorough pharmaceutical care plans were among the clinical competencies that pharmacists wanted to develop. Scientific and interprofessional communication was also among the abilities they wished to optimize., What Is New and Conclusion: This study provided unique information about pharmacists practising in FMGs and elicited several needs. The results will inform the development of a practice-based network aimed at fulfilling these needs., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

A needs assessment study of pharmacists working in family medicine groups (FMG) demonstrated the necessity to build a practice-based network. This network would foster a faster integration into FMG and a more efficient collaborative practice. It would also take advantage of an existing practice-based research network (PBRN)-the STAT ( Soutien Technologique pour l'Application et le Transfert des pratiques novatrices en pharmacie ) network. A working group of nine FMG pharmacists from the different regions of the province of Quebec, Canada, and a committee of partners, including the key pharmacy organizations, were created. Between January 2018 and May 2019, nine meetings took place to discuss the needs assessment results and deploy an action plan. The practice-based network first year activities allowed identifying pharmacists working in FMGs across the province. A directory of these pharmacists was published on the STAT network. The vision, mission, mandate, name (« Réseau Québécois des Pharmaciens GMF ») and logo were developed. The first few activities include: Bi-monthly newsletters; a mentorship program; short evidence-based therapeutic letters (pharmacotherapeutic capsules) and a start-up kit to facilitate integration of these pharmacists. The Quebec FMG pharmacist practice-based network has been launched. It is planned to evaluate the members' satisfaction in late Spring 2020 with regards to activities and resources provided.

Objective: To summarize the best available evidence regarding various topics related to primary care management of opioid use disorder (OUD)., Data Sources: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Google, and the references of included studies and relevant guidelines., Study Selection: Published systematic reviews and newer randomized controlled trials from the past 5 to 10 years that investigated patient-oriented outcomes related to managing OUD in primary care, diagnosis, pharmacotherapies (including buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone), tapering strategies, psychosocial interventions, prescribing practices, and management of comorbidities., Synthesis: From 8626 articles, 39 systematic reviews and an additional 26 randomized controlled trials were included. New meta-analyses were performed where possible. One cohort study suggests 1 case-finding tool might be reasonable to assist with diagnosis (positive likelihood ratio of 10.3). Meta-analysis demonstrated that retention in treatment improves when buprenorphine or methadone are used (64% to 73% vs 22% to 39% for control), when OUD is treated in primary care (86% vs 67% in specialty care, risk ratio [RR] of 1.25, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.47), and when counseling is added to pharmacotherapy (74% vs 62% for controls, RR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.36). Retention was also improved with naltrexone (33% vs 25% for controls, RR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.64) and reduced with medication-related contingency management (eg, loss of take-home doses as a punitive measure; 68% vs 77% for no contingency, RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.99)., Conclusion: There is reasonable evidence that patients with OUD should be managed in the primary care setting. Diagnostic criteria for OUD remain elusive, with 1 reasonable case-finding tool. Methadone and buprenorphine improve treatment retention, while medication-related contingency methods could worsen retention. Counseling is beneficial when added to pharmacotherapy., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)

Objective: To use the best available evidence and principles of shared, informed decision making to develop a clinical practice guideline for a simplified approach to managing opioid use disorder (OUD) in primary care., Methods: Eleven health care and allied health professionals representing various practice settings, professions, and locations created a list of key questions relevant to the management of OUD in primary care. These questions related to the treatment setting, diagnosis, treatment, and management of comorbidities in OUD. The questions were researched by a team with expertise in evidence evaluation using a series of systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials. The Guideline Committee used the systematic reviews to create recommendations., Recommendations: Recommendations outline the role of primary care in treating patients with OUD, as well as pharmacologic and psychotherapy treatments and various prescribing practices (eg, urine drug testing and contracts). Specific recommendations could not be made for management of comorbidities in patients with OUD owing to limited evidence., Conclusion: The recommendations will help simplify the complex management of patients with OUD in primary care. They will aid clinicians and patients in making informed decisions regarding their care., (Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.)