Vaccination Rates, Perceptions, and Information Sources Used by People With Inflammatory Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine vaccination rates, perceptions, and information sources in people with inflammatory arthritis. METHODS: Participants enrolled in the Australian Rheumatology Association Database were invited to participate in an online questionnaire, conducted in January 2020, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Included questions were about vaccination history, modified World Health Organization Vaccination Hesitancy Scale, views of the information sources consulted, the Beliefs About Medicines Questionnaire, education, and the Single-Item Health Literacy Screener. RESULTS: Response rate was 994 of 1498 (66%). The median age of participants was 62 years, with 67% female. Self-reported adherence was 83% for the influenza vaccine. Participants generally expressed positive vaccination views, particularly regarding safety, efficacy, and access. However, only 43% knew which vaccines were recommended for them. Vaccine hesitancy was primarily attributable to uncertainty and a perceived lack of information about which vaccines were recommended. Participants consulted multiple vaccination information sources (median 3, interquartile range 2-7). General practitioners (89%) and rheumatologists (76%) were the most frequently used information sources and were most likely to yield positive views. Negative views of vaccination were most often from internet chatrooms, social media, and mainstream media. Factors of younger age, male gender, and having more concerns about the harms and overuse of medicines in general were associated with lower adherence and greater uncertainty about vaccinations, whereas education and self-reported literacy were not. CONCLUSION: Participants with inflammatory arthritis generally held positive views about vaccination, although there was considerable uncertainty as to which vaccinations were recommended for them. This study highlights the need for improved consumer information about vaccination recommendations for people with inflammatory arthritis.

How early career pharmacists understand resilience - A qualitative study of experiences, challenges and strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Resilience assists healthcare professionals in negotiating challenges, remaining positive when experiencing adversity, and in constructively dealing with difficult work situations and environments. There is increasing research about how early career healthcare professionals, understand and maintain resilience but little is known about support early career pharmacists may need and value. AIMS: To explore early career pharmacists' understanding of resilience, their strategies to enhance and maintain resilience as healthcare professionals and to identify resilience-fostering programmes they perceive could be implemented to support them. METHODS: Three focus groups and 12 semi-structured interviews with a total of 15 hospital pharmacists and 10 community pharmacists (both less than 3 years post-registration) were conducted. An inductive thematic analysis of transcripts was performed to identify main themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Pharmacists understood resilience as the capability to adapt to and learn from challenges and setbacks, which they can build through experience and exposure. Resilience in the workplace was challenged by their working environment and workload, which could lead to ego depletion, the transition from intern to registered pharmacist and working during the COVID-19 pandemic, which both added pressure and uncertainty to their role. Professional resilience was supported on individual, social and organisational levels and through self-care strategies. Pharmacists perceived mentorship and sharing experiences, experiential placements and constructive but challenging role play as potentially beneficial in building resilience during undergraduate studies and internship. DISCUSSION: Pharmacists defined resilience constructively and identified challenges testing but also strategies supporting their resilience in the workplace. Workplaces can support pharmacists by monitoring workload and workplace relationships, creating opportunities for peer and mentor support and by allowing pharmacists to implement their personal, individualised resilience maintaining strategies. Early career pharmacists' experiences and insights would be valuable when considering the design and implementation of resilience-fostering programmes.

Risk factors predictive of adverse drug events and drug-related falls in aged care residents: secondary analysis from the ReMInDAR trial.

BACKGROUND: Residents of aged-care facilities have high rates of adverse drug events. This study aimed to identify risk factors for adverse drug events in aged-care residents. METHOD: This was a secondary study using data from a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Data from 224 residents for whom there was 6 months of baseline information were analysed. We assessed the risk of adverse drug events and falls (post hoc) in the subsequent 6 months. Adverse events were identified via a key word search of the resident care record and adjudicated by a multidisciplinary panel using a modified version of the Naranjo criteria. Covariates identified through univariable logistic regression, including age, sex, medicines, physical activity, cognition (Montreal Cognitive Assessment), previous adverse events and health service use were included in multivariable models. RESULTS: Overall, 224 residents were included, with a mean age of 86 years; 70% were female. 107 (48%) residents had an adverse drug event during the 6-month follow-up. Falls and bleeding were experienced by 73 (33%) and 28 (13%) residents, respectively. Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.10), weight (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.002-1.04), previous fall (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.34-4.98) and sedative or hypnotic medicine use (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.52-2.60) were associated with increased risk of adverse drug events. Increased cognition (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.95) was protective. Risk factors for falls were previous fall (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.68-6.35) and sedative or hypnotic medicines (OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.14-8.16). Increased cognition (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.95) was protective. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest residents with a previous fall, reduced cognition, and prescription of sedative or hypnotic medicines were at higher risk of adverse drug events and should be considered for proactive prevention.