No abstract

No abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to provide a scoping review of the impact of pharmacist-led interventions on medication adherence and clinical outcomes in patients with hypertension and hyperlipidemia. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using pre-defined search terms in three scientific databases, including Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and PubMed. A multi-stage screening process that considered relevancy, publication year (2009-2019), English language, and article type (original research) was followed. Review articles, meta-analysis studies, and conference proceedings were excluded. Data charting was done in an iterative process using a study-specific extraction form. Results: Of the initially identified 681 studies, 17 studies with 136,026 patients were included in the review. Of these, 16 were randomized controlled trials, while the remaining study was a retrospective cohort study. The majority of pharmacist-led interventions were face-to-face counseling sessions (n=8), followed by remote-or telephone-based interventions (n=5) and multi-faceted interventions (n=4). The majority of the studies (n=7) used selfreported adherence measures and pharmacy refill records (n=8) to measure the rate of adherence to prescribed medications. Eleven of the included studies reported a statistically significant (P<0.05) impact on medication adherence. Overall, twelve studies assessed the effect of the interventions on the clinical outcome measures; of these, only four studies were associated with significant impact. Conclusion: Pharmacist-led interventions were associated with improved patients' adherence to their medications but were less likely to be consistently associated with the attainment of clinical outcomes. Face-to-face counseling was the most commonly used intervention; while, the multi-faceted interventions were more likely to be effective in improving the overall outcome measures. The rigorous design of targeted interventions with more frequent follow-ups, careful consideration of the involved medications, and patients' characteristics could increase the effectiveness of these interventions.

Background The aim of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) to colistin-based regimen in the treatment of infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE). Methods This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study of inpatients who received either CAZ-AVI or intravenous colistin for treatment of infections due to CRE. The study was conducted in 5 tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Main study outcomes included in-hospital mortality, clinical cure at end of treatment, and acute kidney injury (AKI). Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression model were conducted to assess the independent impact of CAZ-AVI on the clinical outcome. Results A total of 230 patients were included in this study: 149 patients received CAZ-AVI and 81 patients received colistin-based regimen. Clinical cure (71% vs 52%; P = 0.004; OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.31–4.01) was significantly more common in patients who received CAZ-AVI. After adjusting the difference between the two groups, treatment with CAZ-AVI is independently associated with clinical cure (adjusted OR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.28–5.91). In-hospital mortality (35% vs 44%; P = 0.156; OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.39–1.16) was lower in patients who received CAZ-AVI but the difference was not significant. AKI (15% vs 33%; P = 0.002; OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19–0.69) was significantly less common in patients who received CAZ-AVI. Conclusion CAZ-AVI is associated with higher rate of clinical cure and lower rate of AKI compared to colistin. Our findings support the preferential use of CAZ-AVI over colistin-based regimen for treating these infections.