The National Institute of Health's concept of team science is a means of addressing complex clinical problems by applying conceptual and methodological approaches from multiple disciplines and health professions. The ultimate goal is the improved quality of care of patients with an emphasis on better population health outcomes. Collaborative research practice occurs when researchers from >1 health-related profession engage in scientific inquiry to jointly create and disseminate new knowledge to clinical and research health professionals in order to provide the highest quality of patient care to improve population health outcomes. Training of clinicians and researchers is necessary to produce clinically relevant evidence upon which to base patient care for disease management and empirically guided team-based patient care. In this study, we hypothesized that team science is an example of effective and impactful interprofessional collaborative research practice. To assess this hypothesis, we examined the contemporary literature on the science of team science (SciTS) produced in the past 10 years (2005–2015) and related the SciTS to the overall field of interprofessional collaborative practice, of which collaborative research practice is a subset. A modified preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach was employed to analyze the SciTS literature in light of the general question: Is team science an example of interprofessional collaborative research practice? After completing a systematic review of the SciTS literature, the posed hypothesis was accepted, concluding that team science is a dimension of interprofessional collaborative practice.

There is a need to address prescribing of potentially inappropriate medications to older, non-white patients who have diabetes. Living in rural areas is also an important factor in prescribing patterns for older adults with diabetes. Our findings suggest that interventions are warranted to address this health problem. One solution is the establishment of interprofessional and multidisciplinary teams of health care providers constituted of prescribers and nonprescribers to comprehensively evaluate prescribing practices.

Introduction: Mood stabilizers are the recommended treatment for patients who receive a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Because of the necessity of mood stabilizer treatment in patients with bipolar disorder and the extent of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles involved, the purpose of this review is to summarize the pharmacokinetic principles of lithium in addition to the pharmacodynamics of lithium, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and valproic acid/valproate.Methods: Practice guidelines, review articles, and clinical trials were located using online databases PubMed, CINAHL, IDIS, and Medline. Search terms included at least one of the following: bipolar disorder, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, lithium, mood stabilizers, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, valproate, and valproic acid. Online clinical databases Dynamed® and Lexicomp® were also used in the study.Results: Mood stabilizers collectively possess distinct qualities that are closely regarded before, during, and after therapeutic initiation. Individual patient characteristics, coupled with these observed traits, add to the complexity of selecting the most optimal neurologic agent. Each medication discussed uniquely contributes to both the maintenance and restoration of overall patient well-being.Discussion: Introduction of mood stabilizers into drug regimens is often done in the presence of an array of mitigating factors. Safety and efficacy measures are commonly used to gauge desired results. Careful monitoring of patients' responses to selected therapies is paramount for arriving at appropriate clinical outcomes.

BackgroundIschemic stroke is a risk associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) and is estimated to occur five times more often in afflicted patients than in those without AF. Anti-thrombotic therapy is recommended for the prevention of ischemic stroke. Risk stratification tools, such as the CHADS2, and more recently the CHA2DS2-VASc, for predicting stroke in patients with AF have been developed to determine the level of stroke risk and assist clinicians in the selection of antithrombotic therapy. Warfarin, for stroke prevention in AF, is the most commonly prescribed anticoagulant in North America. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of using the CHADS2 score levels (low and high) in contrast to the CHA2DS2-VASc when examining the outcome of warfarin prescriptions for adult patients with AF. The CHA2DS2-VASc tool was not widely used in 2010, when the data analyzed were collected. It has only been since 2014 that CHA2DS2-VASc criteria has been recommended to guide anticoagulant treatment in updated AF treatment guidelines.MethodsBivariate and multivariate data analysis strategies were used to analyze 2010 National Ambulatory Care Survey (NAMCS) data. NAMCS is designed to collect data on the use and provision of ambulatory care services nationwide. The study population for this research was US adults with a diagnosis of AF. Warfarin prescription was the dependent variable for this study. The study population was 7,669,844 AF patients.ResultsBivariate analysis revealed that of those AF patients with a high CHADS2 score, 25.1% had received a warfarin prescription and 18.8 for those with a high CHA2DS2-VASc score. Logistic regression analysis yielded that patients with AF had higher odds of having a warfarin prescription if they had a high CHADS2 score, were Caucasian, lived in a zip code where < 20% of the population had a university education, and lived in a zip code where < 10% of the population were living in households with incomes below the federal poverty level. Further, the analysis yielded that patients with AF had lesser odds of having a warfarin prescription if they were ≥ 65 years of age, female, or had health insurance.ConclusionsOverall, warfarin appears to be under-prescribed for patients with AF regardless of the risk stratification system used. Based on the key findings of our study opportunities for interventions are present to improve guideline adherence in alignment with risk stratification for stroke prevention. Interprofessional health care teams can provide improved medical management of stroke prevention for patients with AF. These interprofessional health care teams should be constituted of primary care providers (physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners), nurses (RN, LPN), and pharmacists (PharmD, RPh).