Search

Background: Very few extensive studies have measured the prevalence and usage pattern of drug information leaflet (DIL) for oral non-prescription drugs (ONPDs) or identified the associated risk factors for not reading DIL among university students in the UAE. Objective: The current study aimed to estimate the prevalence of the usage pattern of DIL for ONPDs, and delineate the associated risk factors for not reading the DIL among university students. Methods: A cross-sectional survey-based multistage sampling technique conducted among 2875 students at three major universities in UAE. The self-administered validated questionnaire was constructed and developed based on Andersen’s behavioral model. Binomial logistic regression performed to ascertain the effects of 25 potential predictors on the likelihood that participants not reading (discarded) the DIL after reading them. The primary outcome measure was reading (discarding without reading) the DIL, and the associated behaviours. Results: 2875 university students were eligible to participate in the study, but only 2519 students agreed to participate, indicating an 88% of intent participation. However, only 2,355 (81.9%) students completed the questionnaire. 1348 respondents reported using NPD (response rate 46.9%) during the past three months before conducting the study, which comprised the sample analysis (1307 were excluded). More than three-quarters of them read the DIL (always or often) at the first use (1049 of 1348, 77.8%). Approximately a quarter of those who read the DIL reported that they discarded them after reading (24.1%). The survey has identified four risk factors for not reading the DIL: those who get the drug information from physicians or pharmacists had lower odds of discarding the DIL (odds ration [OR] = 0.491, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.273-0.884, p value< 0.05). Medical students had lower odds of discarding the DIL (OR = 0.598, 95% CI: 0.412-0.868, p value< 0.05). Those participants who believ

Background: Recently, direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) has been projected for secondary prevention of recurrent ischemic events post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The addition of a DOAC to the antiplatelet regimen of subjects with the ACS is clinically practiced in candidates where compelling anticoagulation is indicated by high thromboembolic risk. The current evidence provides approved compelling indication for the DOAC, particularly for rivaroxaban which bears the strongest existing evidence. Objective: We intend to assess the role of DOAC in addition to single or dual antiplatelet therapy in subjects with ACS. We will compare the clinical characteristics and explore the efficacy and safety of the DOAC class members (apixaban, betrixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) in terms of reduction in ischemic events in subjects with ACS (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] or non–ST-segment elevation [NSTEMI]) or subjects who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and or ACS and coexisting atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: Relevant data will be searched on known data-bases such as Embase, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Central, and PubMed. The trials included will be randomized controlled trials from 2009 to 2022. Subjects will be receiving DOAC for ACS were evaluated for inclusion. The extraction, synthesis, quality, and validity of data will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. The risk of bias tool, version 2.0 (Cochrane) will be used for risk of bias assessment. Data will be pooled using random-effects models. The primary outcome measure will be efficacy end point (composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke), while the safety outcome will be minor/major bleeding. Results: We will report the primary efficacy end point risk in the various regimens (DOAC plus SAPT or DAPT) with odds ratio (confidence interval) and both statistical and clinical significance.

Background: Since outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, almost whole world asked to wear the facemask especially in the public areas as a precaution to avoid the transmission of the disease, and curbs the pandemic. Looking from another perspective, we need to consider the effect of the facemask in reducing allergic rhinitis symptoms. Objective: The current study objective was to assess the impact of facemasks on the symptoms of allergic rhinitis in subjects who were obligatory using facemask due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The current study was ethically approved self-administered validated survey (Cronbach Alfa 0.81) comprised of 28-items to assess the impact of wearing the facemask, and whether there was an improvement in symptoms of allergic rhinitis. The outcome measure was the responses to the four domains (knowledge, attitude, symptoms, and help/advice) measured on Likert scale to assess the responses of subjects with allergic rhinitis during the COVID -19 pandemic. Results: 82 respondents (mean age was 22.59 ±2.77 years) have completed the survey, of which 73 females (89%) and (52/82, 63.4%) university students. 29 (35.4%), stated that the fabric facemask is useful in reduction of symptoms. 44 (53.7%) believe that the surgical mask N95 is very beneficial in the reduction of symptoms. There was a significant difference in knowledge levels for both eye and nasal symptoms’ reduction responses (P <0.001). Tukey’s HSD (honestly significant difference) used to determine the specifics of the variances (differences in multiple means) in symptom reduction. For eye symptoms, the analysis revealed that respondents who reported that they had reduced symptoms had higher knowledge scores (6.74±2.7) than those who reported no reduction in allergic symptoms (mean ±SD: 4.96±3.2). The lowest score was associated with respondents that were uncertain regarding their symptom alleviation (mean ±SD: 4.53±3.1). For nasal symptoms, the analysis revealed that respondents who reported

Background: Combined hydralazine-nitrate has an avenue in the management of subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Exploring the pharmacotherapy in this context will facilitate the clinical utility of the combined therapy. Objective: The main objective of this mini-review was to evaluate the role of combined hydralazine-nitrate in subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Methods: We conducted a literature search on Google scholar, MEDLINE, and PubMed to identify the randomized clinical trials on combined hydralazine-nitrate, in subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. 2760 articles were returned initially out of which 10 trials were conforming to the inclusion criteria. However, three trails were the focus for the current mini-review. Key findings: The current mini-review lends support to the use of combined hydralazine-nitrate in subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The combination may offer subjects who have remained symptomatic with HFrEF despite optimum dosing of standard therapy. Black subjects with HFrEF have proved to benefit from combined hydralazine-nitrate. The combination (e.g. small dose of hydralazine 12.5-25 mg twice a day and isosorbide mononitrate 10 mg twice a day) may provide alternative clinical utility in subjects with contraindications (renal artery stenosis, creatinine clearance less than 30 mL/minute, sustained hyperkalemia) to the use of ACEinh, ARBs, and/or ARNI. Subjects with HFrEF on combined hydralazine-nitrate should be assessed and monitored for systolic BP (keep >120 mmHg) and subjects with chronic kidney disease (keep eGFR > 30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Hydralazine-nitrate was inferior to ACEinh (higher all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Conclusion: The current mini- review provides the key points to support the use of hydralazine-nitrate in subjects with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction…

Background: To the best of our knowledge few published studies have been conducted to evaluate customer’s care services in community pharmacies in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) using the pseudo-customer model. This further indicates that there is a paucity of information available about the current care services provided by the community pharmacists particularly for pregnant women with migraine. Objective: The main objective was to evaluate, the effectiveness of the pseudo-customer method on the care services (counseling, advice, and management) provided by the community pharmacists for migraine during pregnancy. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in community pharmacies with a cluster sampling of pharmacists. A sample of 200 community pharmacists was recruited from three emirates in the United Arab Emirates. Pregnant woman-related migraine management was assessed using the pseudo-customer model. The used script is not of a real patient but a fake/scripted used to describe the study. Results: No association was found between the gender and nationality of community pharmacists and the ability to be proactive (P =0.5, 0.568) and between the utilization of source of information and gender (P =0.31). The ability to prescribe by community pharmacists without probing or only after a probe was independent of job title (P =0.310); gender (P =0.44) and nationality (P =0.128). The community pharmacists who have offered written information have had significantly higher odds to dispense medication compared to those who have not (OR =45.547, 95% CI: 2.653 - 782.088, P =0.008). Furthermore, the pharmacists who have been reported to ask for precipitating factors of migraine had significantly higher odds to dispense medication compared to those who have not (OR =11.955, 95% CI: 1.083-131.948, P =0.043). The main outcome was the responses of the community pharmacists to the pseudo-customer visit (pregnant woman with migraine). Conclusions: The community pharmacist’

Background: A surgical site infection (SSI) has significant clinical, humanistic and economic consequences. Surgical antimicrobials prophylaxis (SAP) is a reliable standard to prevent SSIs. Objective: The objective was to test that the clinical pharmacist’s interventions may facilitate the implementation of SAP protocol and subsequent reduction of SSIs. Methods: This was double blinded randomized controlled interventional hospital-based-study at Khartoum State-Sudan. A total of 226 subjects underwent general surgeries at four surgical units. Subjects were randomized to interventions and controls in a (1:1) ratio where patient, assessors and physician were blinded. The surgical team has received structured educational and behavioral SAP protocol mini courses by way of directed lecturers, workshops, seminars and awareness campaigns delivered by the clinical pharmacist. The clinical pharmacist provided SAP protocol to the interventions group. The outcome measure was the primary reduction in SSIs. Results: There were (51.8%, 117/226) females, (61/113 interventions versus 56/113 controls), and (48.2%, 109/226) males (52 interventions and 57 controls). The overall rate of SSIs was assessed during 14 days post-operatively and was documented in (35.4%, 80/226). The difference in adherence to locally developed SAP protocol regarding the recommended antimicrobial was significant (P <0.001) between the interventions group (78, 69%) and the controls group (59, 52.2%). The clinical pharmacist’s implementation of the SAP protocol revealed significant differences in SSIs with reduction in SSIs from 42.5% to 25.7% versus the controls group from 57.5% to 44.2% respectively, P = 0.001 between the interventions group and the controls group respectively. Conclusion: The clinical pharmacist’s interventions were very effective in sustainable adherence to SAP protocol and subsequent reduction in SSIs within the interventions group.

Background: Warfarin is well known as a narrow therapeutic index that has prodigious variability in response which challenges dosing adjustment for the maintenance of therapeutic international normalized ratio. However, an appreciated population not on new oral anticoagulants may still need to be stabilized with warfarin dosing. Objective: The current study’s main objective was to validate and compare two models of warfarin clinical algorithm models namely the Gage and the International Warfarin Pharmacogenetics Consortium (IWPC) with warfarin 5 mg fixed standard dosing strategy in a sample of Sudanese subjects. Method: We have conducted a cross-sectional study recruited from the out-patient clinic at a tertiary specialized heart center. We included subjects with unchanged warfarin dose (stabilized), and with therapeutic international normalized ratio. The predicted doses of warfarin in the two models were calculated by three different methods (accuracy, clinical practicality, and the clinical safety of the clinical algorithms). Main outcome measure: The primary outcomes were the measurements of the clinical (accuracy, practicality, and safety) in each of the two clinical algorithms models compared to warfarin 5 mg fixed standard dose strategy. Results: We have enrolled 71 Sudanese subjects with mean age (51.7 ± 14 years), of which (49, 69.0%) were females. There was no significant difference between the warfarin 5 mg fixed standard dose strategy and the predicted doses of the two clinical algorithm models (MAE 1.44, 1.45, and 1.49 mg/day [P =0.4]) respectively. In the clinical practicality, all of the three models had a high percent of subjects (95.0%, 51.9%, and 66.7%) in the ideal dose range in middle dose group (3-7 mg/ day) for warfarin 5 mg fixed standard dosing strategy, Gage, and IWPC clinical algorithm models respectively. However, a small percent of subjects was exhibited in the warfarin low dose group ≤ 3 mg/day (0.0%, 15.0%, and 10.0%) and warfarin high

Background: There is a paucity of studies describing the risk factors for developing ischemic stroke in our region. Objective: The objective of the current study was to delineate the potential risk factors for the development of ischemic stroke. Methods: We have conducted a retrospective cohort hospitalbased study that has enrolled 231 subjects. The subjects have had presented to the emergency department in a tertiary hospital in the United Arab Emirates. Subjects were diagnosed with ischemic stroke within 24 hours of presentation. Outcome measure: The main outcome measure was the development of ischemic stroke during an indexed hospital visit. Results: The mean age was 47.5 ±3.2 with a higher preponderance of males over females (60.9%) and 48.1% were ≥ 65 years. The final logistic regression model for the development of ischemic stroke contains seven variables. In descending order, the seven predictive risk factors for the development of ischemic stroke were: hypertension (OR 6.1, CI 2.4-9.5; P = 0.029), coronary artery disease (OR 4.2, 3.7-9.1; P = 0.038), low physical activity (OR 4.2, CI 2.1-9.1; P = 0.035), history of previous stroke (OR 4.1, 1.4-3.4; P = 0.033), atrial fibrillation (OR 3.2, CI 2.6-8.2; P = 0.017), family history of stroke (OR 3.1, 1.3-6.9; P = 0.042) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.7, CI 1.25-6.1; P = 0.035). The specificity of the model was 58.1%; the sensitivity was 86.1%, and the overall accuracy was 75.7%. Conclusion: It is prudent to control modifiable risk factors for the development of strokes such as hypertension, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, and low physical activity.

Background: Knowledge of potential and amenable risk factors involved in the development of postoperative delirium (POD) is imperative for successful prevention and subsequent management. Objective: The current study objective was to delineate the risk factors associated with the occurrence of POD among patients undergoing surgical procedures. Methods: This multi-center (6 hospitals), cross-sectional prospective hospital-based study recruited 415 subjects aged ≥50 years who were scheduled to undergo different types of surgery. Delirium Observational Screening Scale used for the diagnosis of POD. Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire used for assessing the nutritional and the hydration status of patients. Pre and postoperative risk factors analyzed by univariate (chi square) and then multivariate analyses and the incidence rate of POD, was reported. Results: The main outcome measure was the development of POD. Out of the 385, only 43 subjects (11.2%) developed POD. High American Society of Anesthesiologists score (OR: 10.76, 95% CI: 1.379-83.99, P =0.023), duration of surgery (OR: 5.426, 95% CI: [2.249-13.092]; P =0.0001), were the strongest independent risk factors for the development of POD. Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living score (OR: 3.227, 95% CI: [1.177-8.844], P =0.023), and age ≥ 70 years (OR: 1.174, 95% CI: [1.015-1.359]; P =0.027) were additional strongest independent risk factors for the development of POD. Conclusion: Based on analysis or study, we found High American Society of Anesthesiologist sore, Katz-ADL, duration of surgery, and advanced age were predictors of POD. Our findings suggest preventive measures initiated in subjects identified at risk of developing POD. These results support the healthcare providers in the early prevention, diagnosis, and timely management of POD.

Background: Shortening the process of prescribing via permitting the pharmacist to select the most appropriate pharmaceuticals for each particular patient may provide great opportunities for pharmacists to develop suitable pharmaceutical care plan, monitor and follow up prescribed medications, communicate and consult physicians for more confirmations. Objective: The objective of the current protocol for the systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacists prescribing interventions was to explore, investigate the evidence, assess and compare PICO in patients with medical conditions (population), receiving pharmacist’s prescribing care services (interventions) versus non-pharmacist’s prescribing (comparators), and identify how it will impact the clinical, humanistic, and economic patient’s outcomes (outcomes). Methods: The necessary elements of PRISMA will be strictly followed to report the systematic review. The meta-analysis will be reported in line with the Cochrane guidelines for synthesis of trials and all forms will be based on quality measures as per the validated Cochrane templates. We will present the results of the systematic review and the meta-analysis based on PICO comparison between the included trials. Results: We have identified four models of pharmacist prescribing interventions (independent, dependent [collaborative], supplementary, and emergency prescribing). The results will contain a systematic critical evaluation of the included trials in terms of the sample number of the population (characteristics), the type of interventions and the comparators, and the main outcome measures. Conclusion: This protocol will report the evidence and explore the magnitude of impact of pharmacist prescribing interventions, on clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes. .