The STISIM highway driving simulator test is able to differentiate dose-dependent impairment after administration of alcohol. The highway driving test scenario is suitable for future psychopharmacological research.

Risk-taking behavior is a major determinant of health and plays a central role in various diseases. Therefore, a brief questionnaire was developed to assess risk taking among young adults with known different levels of risk-taking behavior (social drinkers and recreational drug users). In Study 1, N = 522 university students completed the RT-18 risk taking questionnaire. N = 100 students were retested after 2 to 4 weeks and performed the Cambridge Gambling Task (CGT). Mean RT-18 score was 7.69 and Cronbach’s alpha was 0.886. The test-retest reliability was r = 0.94. Significant correlation was found between the RT-18 score and CGT scores of risk taking, bet proportion, and risk adjustment. In Study 2, N = 7834 young adult social drinkers, and recreational drug users, mean RT-18 score was 9.34 and Cronbach’s alpha was 0.80. Factor analysis showed that the RT-18 comprises two factors assessing level of risk-taking behavior and risk assessment. Men scored significantly higher than women on the RT-18. Recreational drug users had significantly higher scores when compared to social drinkers. In Study 3 of N = 1000 students, construct validity was confirmed by showing that the RT-18 outcome correlates significantly with scores on the Stimulating-Instrumental Risk Inventory. In conclusion, the RT-18 is a valid and reliable screening tool to differentiate levels of risk-taking behavior. This short scale is quick and practical to administer, imposing minimal demands on participants. The RT-18 is able to differentiate risk taking and risk assessment which can help target appropriate intervention strategies.

Background Community pharmacists play an important role in supporting patients for optimal drug use. Objective To assess the effectiveness of monitoring in asthma patients with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) on disease control. Setting Asthma patients using ICS were invited from two intervention (IG) and two control pharmacies (CG). Method Participating patients completed questionnaires at the study start and at 6-month follow-up, including the Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) questionnaire. IG patients completed the CARAT questionnaire every 2 weeks and received counselling on disease management, ICS adherence, and inhalation technique when scores were suboptimal, deteriorating, or absent. For Turbuhaler users, additional electronic monitoring (EMI) was available, with daily alerts for ICS intake. Main outcome measure As the primary outcome, CARAT scores at follow-up were compared between IG and CG using linear regression. As secondary outcome, refill adherence was compared using logistic regression. Results From March to July 2015, we enrolled 39 IG and 41 CG patients. At follow-up, CARAT scores did not differ between IG and CG (−0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], −2.57 to 2.20), neither did patient numbers with ICS adherence >80% (0.82; 95% CI, 0.28–2.37). Among EMI users, CARAT scores did not differ, but ICS adherence >80% showed a 4.52-fold increase (95% CI, 1.56–13.1) compared with EMI nonusers. Conclusion Among community-dwelling asthma patients, pharmacist monitoring did not affect CARAT scores, but EMI use showed improved ICS refill adherence.

Objectives The aim of this study was to explore pharmacists’ barriers and facilitators regarding participation in pharmacy practice research. Methods We conducted an online cross‐sectional survey in 1974 community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Key findings A total of 252 pharmacists completed the questionnaire. The majority agreed that participation in research should be part of daily practice. Efficient time investment and a clear benefit for general professional knowledge, patient care and pharmacy organisation were the most important facilitating factors. Conclusions To encourage pharmacists’ participation, researchers should offer clear instructions, possibilities for flexible time management, simple patient inclusion, task delegation and no additional contacts with healthcare professionals due to the research.