The net effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the response to it on the emergence of antimicrobial resistance is yet unknown. Positive impacts on the spread of multiresistant pathogens and infections in general may be observed with the implementation of general preventative measures for the spread of infectious disease such as social distancing, reduced travel and increased personal hygiene. This pandemic has accelerated the development of novel technologies, such as mRNA vaccines, that may be used to fight other diseases. These should be capitalized upon to manage the ongoing antimicrobial resistance pandemic in the background. However, it is likely that the COVID-19 pandemic is fueling the emergence of antimicrobial resistance due to high rates of inappropriate antimicrobial prescribing, the high use of biocides and the interruption of treatment for other conditions. Clinical uncertainty driven by the lack of effective diagnostics and practice of telemedicine may have driven the inappropriate use of antimicrobials. As pathogens know no borders, increased focus is needed for infectious diseases still threatening low- and middle-income countries such as tuberculosis. Stewardship measures for future outbreaks should stress the importance of social distancing and hand washing but discourage the overuse of disinfectants and antimicrobials that are not proven effective.

This summary relates to https://doi.

Community pharmacists recognize the need to implement antimicrobial stewardship activities in community pharmacies. They are in a unique position to provide triage for common primary care indications and to lower the burden of patients at general practitioners’ offices. However, research shows that, in some areas, dispensing of antimicrobials without valid prescription is still highly prevalent. Regardless of training, every community pharmacist can give his contribution to antimicrobial stewardship. One of the basic elements should be antimicrobial dispensing according to regulations, either prescription only, or according to guidelines where pharmacists have prescribing authority. Patient consultation supported with educational materials, such as leaflets, may reduce patients’ expectations to receive antibiotics for self-limiting infections and reduce pressure on general practitioners to prescribe antibiotics on patients’ demand. Treatment optimization may be achieved in collaboration with the prescribing general practitioners or by providing feedback. At last, pharmacists provided with additional training may be encouraged to provide consultation services to long-term care facilities, to introduce point-of-care testing for infectious diseases in their pharmacies or prescribe antimicrobials for uncomplicated infections. These services are welcomed by patients and communities. Expanding pharmacy services and pharmacists’ prescribing autonomy have shown a positive impact by reducing antibiotics consumption, thus ensuring better compliance with treatment guidelines.

Background: Pharmacists are commonly tasked with recommending the appropriate dietary supplement and advising the patients of their correct and safe use. Previous research, conducted on pharmacy students, showed that they did not always use the evidence based sources of information, with personal use identified as a significant predictor influencing the decision to recommend a supplement. Objectives: To compare use, perceptions and knowledge of dietary supplements of pharmacists with different years of work experience and to explore factors that could influence their recommendation of supplements. Methods: A questionnaire based cross-sectional study was conducted on Croatian community pharmacists in September 2017. The questionnaire explored pharmacists’ demographic characteristics, use, perceptions and knowledge of dietary supplements. Pharmacists (N=102) were divided in two groups based on their work experience: P0 (<10 years) and P1 (≥10 years). Results: All included pharmacists had high knowledge scores without differences between groups (P0=10, IQR 9-12 vs P1=11, IQR 9-12, expressed as median and interquartile range (IQR), p=0.275). Less experienced pharmacists perceived there was less research conducted on the dietary supplements compared to their more experienced counterparts (P0=1, IQR 1-2 vs P1=2, IQR 2-3, expressed as median and interquartile range, p<0.001). Groups differed in sources used when choosing the appropriate supplement with P0 using higher quality sources such as systematic reviews in comparison to P1 (32.1% vs 8.7%, p=0.004). Pharmacists’ decision to recommend a dietary supplement was influenced by their personal use (odds ratio 0.216, 95%CI 0.068:0.689, p=0.01) and work experience (odds ratio 0.154, 95%CI 0.045:0.530, p=0.003). Conclusions: Pharmacists did not use the high quality sources when recommending dietary supplements and their decision to recommend the supplement was not based on objective evaluation of evidence. Further education about the practice of evidence-based pharmacy is necessary, with special emphasis on senior pharmacists who might have missed that aspect during their formal education.