No abstract

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic has lasted for nearly 4 months by this study was conducted. We aimed to describe drug utilization, disease progression, and adverse drug events of COVID-19. Methods:A retrospective, single-center case series study enrolled 165 consecutive hospitalized COVID-19 patients who were followed up until March 25, 2020, from a designated hospital in Wuhan. Patients were grouped by a baseline degree of severity: non-severe and severe. An analytical study of drug utilization, disease progression, and adverse events (AEs) of COVID-19 was conducted.Results: Of the 165 COVID-19 cases, antivirals, antibacterials, glucocorticoids, and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) were administered to 92.7%, 98.8%, 68.5%, and 55.2% of patients, respectively. The total kinds of drugs administered to the severe subgroup [26, interquartile range (IQR) 18-39] were 11 more than the non-severe subgroup (15, IQR 10-24), regardless of comorbidities. The 2 most common combinations of medications in the 165 cases were 'antiviral therapy + glucocorticoids + TCM' (81, 49.1%) and 'antiviral therapy + glucocorticoids' (23, 13.9%). Compared with non-severe cases, severe cases received more glucocorticoids (88.5% vs. 66.2%, P=0.02), but less TCM (50.0% vs. 63.3%, P=0.20), and suffered a higher percentage of death (34.6% vs. 7.2%, P=0.001). At the end of the follow-up, 130 (78.8%) patients had been discharged, and 24 (14.5%) died. There were 13 patients (7.9%) who had elevated liver enzymes, and 49 patients (29.7%) presented with worsening kidney function during the follow-up.Conclusions: Of the 165 COVID-19 patients, the fatality rate remained high (14.5%). Drug utilization for COVID-19 was diverse and generally complied with the existing guidelines. Combination regimens containing antiviral drugs might be beneficial to assist COVID-19 recovery. Additionally, liver and kidney AEs should not be ignored.

Background: Healthcare professionals’ knowledge and attitudes towards adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and ADR reporting play a significant role in pharmacovigilance. This study aims to investigate the gap between knowledge and practice in ADR reporting among hospital pharmacists.Methods: This study is a multi-center, cross-sectional study based on a questionnaire survey. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed including knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) towards ADR reporting. From October to November 2021, questionnaires were filled out on the internet by hospital pharmacists from a central province of China. The data analysis used a one-way ANOVA to analyze the differences between the pharmacist’s characteristics and knowledge and attitude, respectively. The ordinal logistic regression method was used to analyze the predictors of practice.Results: A total of 1,026 valid questionnaires from 512 medical institutions were collected. It was found that 88.8% of participants have a clear understanding of the ADR definition, while 59.6% of them have misunderstandings about the reporting time of new and serious adverse reactions. Most pharmacists showed positive attitudes towards ADR reporting. Higher education background, higher professional title, attending training, and clinical pharmacist resulted in higher knowledge scores. Higher education background, shorter working years, attending training, and from non-tertiary hospital related to higher attitude scores. In terms of practice, age, hospital type, working years, training, and pharmacist type all have significant associations with practice scores. Pharmacists’ knowledge score and attitude score were significant predictors of practice score with OR being 1.19 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.33) and 1.04 (95% CI: 1.005, 1.07).Conclusion: Although most hospital pharmacists showed positive attitudes towards ADR reporting, their knowledge and practice were still insufficient. Hospital pharmacists’ knowledge and attitude are associated with their practice towards ADR reporting. The training had a significant impact on the pharmacist’s knowledge, attitude, and practice.

No abstract

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to the emergence of global health care. In this study, we aimed to explore the association between drug treatments and the incidence of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. A retrospective study was conducted on 5113 COVID-19 patients in Hubei province, among which 395 incurred liver injury. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by Cox proportional hazards models. The results showed that COVID-19 patients who received antibiotics (HR 1.97, 95% CI: 1.55–2.51, p < 0.001), antifungal agents (HR 3.10, 95% CI: 1.93–4.99, p < 0.001) and corticosteroids (HR 2.31, 95% CI: 1.80–2.96, p < 0.001) had a higher risk of DILI compared to non-users. Special attention was given to the use of parenteral nutrition (HR 1.82, 95% CI: 1.31–2.52, p < 0.001) and enteral nutrition (HR 2.71, 95% CI: 1.98–3.71, p < 0.001), which were the risk factors for liver injury. In conclusion, this study suggests that the development of DILI in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 needs to be closely monitored, and the above-mentioned drug treatments may contribute to the risk of DILI.