OBJECTIVE: To analyze the role played by the clinical pharmacist and its impact in antibiotic stewardship facing suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics. METHOD: We performed 2 different independent bibliographic searches. A total of 35 articles were found, and the final number included in the study was 12. We analyzed the articles and collected variables of efficacy, safety, and applicability of evaluation tools applied to patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactams. Also, the variation in the consumption and prescription profile of alternative antibiotics was analyzed. RESULTS: The selected studies analyzed questionnaires, allergy delabeling, intradermal tests, and oral challenge tests performed by pharmacists. Significant differences in the efficacy endpoint were found in 4 studies in favor of pharmaceutical intervention. In the study of Kwiatkowski et al., cefazolin use increased in surgical patients after pharmacist intervention (65% vs 28%; P < .01). In a quasi-experimental study, the mean defined daily dose of aztreonam and the mean days of therapy per 1000 patients/day decreased (21.23 vs 9.05, P <.01) and (8.79-4.24, P = .016), pre- and post-intervention, respectively, increasing antibiotic de-escalations (P = < .01). In another quasi-experimental study, the prescription of restricted use antibiotics decreased (42.5% vs 17.9%, P < .01) and the use of pre-surgical prophylactic antibiotics alternative to cefazolin (81.9% vs 55.9%, P < .01) in another study. Other study showed that the mean time per interview was 5.2 min per patient. No adverse events were reported in any study. CONCLUSION: The pharmacist intervention in the evaluation of the patient with suspected allergy to beta-lactams is effective, safe, and feasible to implement on daily clinical practice. The standardization of protocols to clarify the history of allergies and development of evaluation tools represent simple screenings to perform delabeling or refer to the Immunoallergology service, improving penicilins use and reducing the need for second-line antibiotics. More studies are needed to standardize the desensitization tests made by pharmacists. However, despite these results, the involvement and leadership of the pharmacist in this area is limited and constitutes a future challenge for the profession.

The COVID-19 pandemic has boosted the adoption of digital health technologies such as teleconsultation. This research aimed to assess and compare barriers and facilitators for teleconsultation uptake for primary care practitioners in Hong Kong and the Netherlands and evaluate the role of their different healthcare funding models in this adoption process within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. A qualitative research following a social constructivist paradigm was performed. The study employed a conceptual framework from Lau and colleagues that identifies four levels of factors influencing change in primary care: (1) external contextual factors; (2) organization-related factors; (3) professional factors; and (4) characteristics of the intervention. The four levels were studied through semi-structured, open-ended interviews with primary care physicians. External factors were additionally assessed by means of a literature review. Hong Kong and the Netherlands showed different penetration rates of teleconsultation. Most stakeholders in both settings shared similar barriers and facilitators in the organizational, professional, and intervention levels. However, external contextual factors (i.e., current teleconsultation legislation, available incentives, and level of public awareness) played an important and differing role in teleconsultation uptake and had a direct effect on the organization, the professionals involved, and the type of technology used. Political and organizational actions are required to develop a comprehensive legal framework for the sustainable development of teleconsultation in both settings.

ObjectiveTo assess the registration quality of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) clinical trials for COVID-19, H1N1, and SARS.MethodWe searched for clinical trial registrations of TCM in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) on April 30, 2020. The registration quality assessment is based on the WHO Trial Registration Data Set (Version 1.3.1) and extra items for TCM information, including TCM background, theoretical origin, specific diagnosis criteria, description of intervention, and outcomes.ResultsA total of 136 records were examined, including 129 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) and 7 H1N1 influenza (H1N1) patients. The deficiencies in the registration of TCM clinical trials (CTs) mainly focus on a low percentage reporting detailed information about interventions (46.6%), primary outcome(s) (37.7%), and key secondary outcome(s) (18.4%) and a lack of summary result (0%). For the TCM items, none of the clinical trial registrations reported the TCM background and rationale; only 6.6% provided the TCM diagnosis criteria or a description of the TCM intervention; and 27.9% provided TCM outcome(s).ConclusionOverall, although the number of registrations of TCM CTs increased, the registration quality was low. The registration quality of TCM CTs should be improved by more detailed reporting of interventions and outcomes, TCM-specific information, and sharing of the result data.

Background Without adequate reporting of research, valuable time and resources are wasted. In the same vein, adequate reporting of practice guidelines to optimise patient care is equally important. Our study examines the quality of reporting of published WHO guidelines, over time, using the RIGHT (Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in HealThcare) reporting checklist. Methods We examined English-language guidelines approved by the WHO Guidelines Review Committee from inception of the committee in 2007 until 31 December 2017. Pairs of independent, trained reviewers assessed the reporting quality of these guidelines. Descriptive data were summarised with frequencies and percentages. Results We included 182 eligible guidelines. Overall, 25 out of the 34 RIGHT items were reported in 75% or more of the WHO guidelines. The reporting rates improved over time. Further, 90% of the guidelines reported document type in the title. The identification of evidence, the rationale for recommendations and the review process were reported in more than 80% of guidelines. The certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was assessed in 81% of the guidelines assessed. While 82% of guidelines reported funding sources, only 25% mentioned the role of funders. Conclusions WHO guidelines provide adequate reporting of many of the RIGHT items and reporting has improved over time. WHO guidelines compare favourably to guidelines produced by other organisations. However, reporting can be further improved in a number of areas.

AIMS: To critically appraise the evidence for effectiveness of pharmacy-based needle/syringe exchange programs (Pharmacy-based NSPs) on risk behaviors (RBs), HIV/HCV prevalence, and economic outcomes among people who inject drugs (PWID). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis SETTING: PRIMARY CARE SETTING: PARTICIPANTS: Of 1,568 studies screened, 14 studies with N = 7035 PWID were included. MEASURES: PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciences, CENTRAL, and Cochrane review databases were searched without language restriction from their inception through January 27, 2016. All published study designs with control group that reported the effectiveness of Pharmacy-based NSP on outcomes of interest were included. Outcomes of interest are RB, HIV/HCV prevalence, and economic outcomes. The estimates of pooled effects of these outcomes were calculated as pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 and chi-squared tests. FINDINGS: Most studies (9/14, 64.3%) were rated as having a serious risk of bias, while 28.6% and 7.1% were rated as having a moderate risk and low risk of bias, respectively. For sharing-syringe behavior, Pharmacy-based NSPs were significantly better than no NSPs for both main (OR: 0.50 (95%CI = 0.34-0.73; I2 = 59.6%)) and sensitivity analyses, excluding studies with a serious risk of bias (OR: 0.52 (95%CI = 0.32-0.84; I2 = 41.4%)). For safe syringe disposal and HIV/HCV prevalence, the evidence for Pharmacy-based NSPs compared with other NSP or No NSP was unclear since few of the studies reported this and most of them had a serious risk of bias. Compared with the total lifetime cost of 55,640 USD for treating a person with HIV infection, the HIV prevalence among PWID has to be at least 0.8% (for Pharmacy-based NSPs) or 2.1% (for other NSPs) to result in cost-savings. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacy-based needle/syringe exchange programs appear to be effective for reducing risk behaviors among people who inject drugs, though their effect on HIV/HCV prevalence and economic outcomes is unclear.

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions have been effective in improving numerous health outcomes and health behaviors; furthermore, they are increasingly being used in different health care areas, including self-management of long-term conditions, mental health, and health promotion. The full potential of digital interventions is hindered by a lack of user engagement. There is an urgent need to develop effective strategies that can promote users' engagement with digital interventions. One potential method is the use of technology-based reminders or prompts. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of technology-based strategies for promoting engagement with digital interventions. METHODS: Cochrane Collaboration guidelines on systematic review methodology were followed. The search strategy was executed across 7 electronic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PsycINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). Databases were searched from inception to September 13, 2013, with no language or publication type restrictions, using three concepts: randomized controlled trials, digital interventions, and engagement. Gray literature and reference lists of included studies were also searched. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by 2 authors, then the full texts of potentially eligible papers were obtained and double-screened. Data from eligible papers were extracted by one author and checked for accuracy by another author. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. Narrative synthesis was performed on all included studies and, where appropriate, data were pooled using meta-analysis. All findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies were included in the review with 8774 participants. Of the 14 studies, 9 had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analyses. The meta-analyses suggested that technology-based strategies can potentially promote engagement compared to no strategy for dichotomous outcomes (relative risk [RR] 1.27, 95% CI 1.01-1.60, I2=71%), but due to considerable heterogeneity and the small sample sizes in most studies, this result should be treated with caution. No studies reported adverse or economic outcomes. Only one study with a small sample size compared different characteristics; the study found that strategies promoting new digital intervention content and those sent to users shortly after they started using the digital intervention were more likely to engage users. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, studies reported borderline positive effects of technology-based strategies on engagement compared to no strategy. However, the results have to be interpreted with caution. More research is needed to replicate findings and understand which characteristics of the strategies are effective in promoting engagement and how cost-effective they are

BACKGROUND: Shared Decision Making (SDM) as means to the involvement of patients in medical decision making is increasingly demanded by treatment guidelines and legislation. Also, matching of patients' preferences to treatments has been shown to be effective regarding symptom reduction. Despite promising results for patients with substance use disorders (SUD) no systematic evaluation of the literature has been provided. The aim is therefore to give a systematic overview of the literature of patient preferences and SDM in the treatment of patients with SUD. METHODS: An electronic literature search of the databases Medline, Embase, Psyndex and Clinical Trials Register was performed. Variations of the search terms substance use disorders, patient preferences and SDM were used. For data synthesis the populations, interventions and outcomes were summarized and described according to the PRISMA statement. Methodological quality of the included articles was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: N = 25 trials were included in this review. These were conducted between 1986 and 2014 with altogether n = 8.729 patients. Two studies found that patients with SUD preferred to be actively involved in treatment decisions. Treatment preferences were assessed in n = 18 studies, where the majority of patients preferred outpatient compared with inpatient treatment. Matching patients to preferences resulted in a reduction on substance use (n = 3 studies), but the majority of studies found no significant effect. Interventions for SDM differed across patient populations and optional therapeutic techniques. DISCUSSION: Patients with substance use disorders should be involved in medical treatment decisions, as patients with other health conditions. A suitable approach is Shared Decision Making, emphasizing the patients' preferences. However, due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, results should be interpreted with caution. Further research is needed regarding SDM interventions in patient populations with substance use disorders

Background: Substance-specific mass media campaigns which address young people are widely used to prevent illicit drug use. They aim to reduce use and raise awareness of the problem.Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of mass media campaigns in preventing or reducing the use of or intention to use illicit drugs amongst young people.Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), including the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group's Specialised Register; MEDLINE through PubMed (from 1966 to 29 January 2013); EMBASE (from 1974 to 30 January 2013) and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I (from 1861 to 3 February 2013).Selection criteria: Cluster-randomised controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, interrupted time series and controlled before and after studies evaluating the effectiveness of mass media campaigns in influencing drug use, intention to use or the attitude of young people under the age of 26 towards illicit drugs.Data collection and analysis: We used the standard methodological procedures of The Cochrane Collaboration.Main results: We included 23 studies involving 188,934 young people, conducted in the USA, Canada and Australia between 1991 and 2012. Twelve studies were randomised controlled trials (RCT), two were prospective cohort studies (PCS), one study was both a RCT and a PCS, six were interrupted time series and two were controlled before and after (CBA) studies. The RCTs had an overall low risk of bias, along with the ITS (apart from the dimension 'formal test of trend'), and the PCS had overall good quality, apart from the description of loss to follow-up by exposure.Self reported or biomarker-assessed illicit drug use was measured with an array of published and unpublished scales making comparisons difficult. Pooled results of five RCTs (N = 5470) show no effect of media campaign intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.15 to 0.12).We also pooled five ITS studies (N = 26,405) focusing specifically on methamphetamine use. Out of four pooled estimates (two endpoints measured in two age groups), there was evidence of a reduction only in past-year prevalence of methamphetamine use among 12 to 17 years old.A further five studies (designs = one RCT with PCS, two PCS, two ITS, one CBA, N = 151,508), which could not be included in meta-analyses, reported a drug use outcome with varied results including a clear iatrogenic effect in one case and reduction of use in another.Authors' conclusions: Overall the available evidence does not allow conclusions about the effect of media campaigns on illicit drug use among young people. We conclude that further studies are needed

OBJECTIVE: Older adults are at risk of rehospitalization if their care transitions from hospital-to-home are not properly managed. The objective of this review was to determine if older patient populations recruited for randomized controlled trials of transitional care interventions represented those at greatest risk of rehospitalization following discharge. Relevant risk factors examined were cognitive impairment, depression, polypharmacy, comorbidity, length of stay, advanced non-malignant diseases, and available social support. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Hospital to home. PARTICIPANTS: Older hospitalized adults. MEASUREMENTS: For inclusion, articles were required to focus on hospital-to-home transitions with a self-care component, have components occurring both before and after discharge, and a randomized controlled trial design. Articles were excluded if participants had a mean age under 55 years, or if interventions focused on developmental disabilities, youth, addictions, or case management, or were solely primary-care based. RESULTS: Following title, abstract, and full review by two authors, 17 articles met inclusion criteria. Risk factors for rehospitalization were often listed either as exclusion criteria or were not reported at baseline by the studies. One study included patients with all identified risk factors for rehospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that published studies of transitional care interventions do not often include older adults at highest risk of rehospitalization, raising concerns about the generalizability of their results. Studies are needed that evaluate interventions that explicitly address the needs and characteristics of these patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of task shifting for the delivery of injectable contraceptives, contraceptive implants, intrauterine devices (IUDs), tubal ligation and vasectomy in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: Multiple electronic databases were searched up to 25 May 2012 for studies which had assessed the delivery of contraceptives by health workers with lower levels of training, compared to delivery by health workers usually assigned this role, or compared to no organized provision of contraceptives. We included randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series. Data were extracted using a standard form and the certainty of the evidence found was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: We identified six randomized controlled trials published between 1977 and 1995 that assessed the safety and effectiveness of task shifting for the delivery of long-term contraceptives. Two studies assessed IUD insertion by nurses compared to doctors, two assessed IUD insertion by auxiliary nurse-midwives compared to doctors, one assessed tubal ligation by midwives compared to doctors, and one assessed the delivery of vasectomy by medical students compared to doctors. In general, little or no difference was found in contraceptive outcomes between cadres. Study design limitations and the low number of eligible studies, however, allow only limited conclusions to be drawn. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that task shifting for the delivery of long-term contraceptives may be a safe and effective approach to increasing access to contraception. Further research is needed because the certainty of the evidence identified is variable