ABSTRACT
Objectives: “Adverse Drug Reaction Relief System” (hereinafter called the Relief System) has been established to provide prompt relief to patients experiencing health damage caused by adverse drug reactions. Since 2018, the Relief System has required community pharmacies that acquire additional points as local support system to actively report adverse drug reactions. Here, we investigated the recognition and utilization of the relief system among community pharmacists.Method: A questionnaire survey was conducted among community pharmacists between August 1 and September 30, 2019.Results: The survey achieved a response rate of 58.1%. The recognition rates of the relief system and Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) as its application destination were 98.9 and 74.5%, respectively. Of the community pharmacists, 2.6% had experience in utilizing the relief system; and 8.8% did not want to recommend the utilization of the relief system for patients mainly because of the “low recognition of the system” and “the complicated and troublesome preparation of the necessary documents such as medical certificates.” The community pharmacists who acquire additional points as local support system, compared with those who do not, achieved significantly higher rates in two items, including that for preparation of the documented procedures pertaining to adverse drug reactions.Conclusion: Despite the high recognition of the relief system among community pharmacists, the percentage of pharmacists with experience in actually utilizing the relief system and applying to the PMDA was low. One reason that the use of the relief system was not widespread was the low recognition particularly of the destination and procedures of reports on adverse drug reactions. In the future, educational campaigns to improve pharmacists’ comprehension of the relief system will be needed. Moreover, pharmacists must play a central role in enhancing the recognition of the public relief system and promoting medical safety.
ABSTRACT
Objective: In this study, we surveyed the attitudes of community pharmacists regarding oral antidiabetic drugs that need to be continuously administered, focusing especially on recently available oral‐combination antidiabetic drugs, in terms of their positioning and medication adherence. In addition, we identified relevant problems from the survey results and discussed the proper use of the combination drugs.Methods: We conducted a questionnaire‐based survey on health insurance‐covered dispensing pharmacies belonging to Kanazawa, Koga, Takasaki, Hitachi, and Hitachinaka Pharmaceutical Associations via fax or post from September 1, 2017 to November 30, 2017.Results: The overall response rate to the survey was 29.8%. Although combination drugs were considered useful in terms of improved motivation to take medication, i.e., medication adherence, there were also opinions claiming that combination drugs are not particularly useful due to the following reasons: there are problems in discarding residual drugs, they are less economical than individual drugs, it is difficult to ingest tablets of combination drugs because of their large size, it is difficult to adjust doses of combination drugs, and medication adherence does not change because of concomitant drug use.Conclusion: Based on the results there was the opinion that a combination oral diabetes drug improves medication adherence but problems such as the generation of leftover unused drugs due to switching and an increase in the risk of overuse when taking medication was pointed out. It is necessary for pharmacists to give advice in recognition of the risks with each active ingredient of the oral diabetes combination drug and to continuously monitor any development of side effects. Furthermore, as with other diabetes remedies, pharmacists need to advise regarding the patient's lifestyle as well as monitor laboratory test results such as kidney function. The patient's swallowing ability is also an important consideration at the time of medication instruction.
ABSTRACT
The most common mandibular fractures involve the condyloid process. It is necessary to diagnose and treat the cases of mandibular condylar fracture carefully, because the temporomandibular joint is complicated anatomically and functionally.<BR>A clinical study was made in 72 patients with mandibular condylar fracture referred to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Gunma University Hospital from April 1991 to March 1995.<BR>The results were as follows:<BR>1. Mandibular condylar fracture occurred in 42.6% of the mandibular fractures. The male-to-female ratio was 2 to 1. The largest age group of patients was from 10 to 19 years (31.9%).<BR>2. The most frequent cause of the injury was falls (50.0%). Of all the patients 84.7% visited our department within 2 weeks after injury.<BR>3. Fifty-nine cases (81.9%) were unilateral fractures and 13 (18.1%) were bilateral. Of the total, thirty-six cases (50.0%) were combined with other fractures of the mandible and/or maxillofacial fractures.<BR>4. As for the fracture level and position of fragment, fractures with deviation were most frequently observed in the subcondylar region (20.5%).<BR>5. Of the 67 cases treated at our department, 62 (92.5%) were treated with a conservative therapy for mandibular condylar fracture, primarily by maxillomandibular fixation followed by functional rehabilitation. The remaining 5 (7.5%) cases were treated surgically.<BR>6. Fifty-nine patients were recalled after more than 6 months. As for the treatment outcome in 54 nonsurgical cases, 46 cases (85.2%) showed excellent prognosis, 6 (11.1%) had disorder I and 2 (3.7%) had disorder II. In 5 surgical cases, 3 cases showed excellent prognosis and 2 had disorder II. Most of the patients treated nonsurgically had relatively good results.