Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
J Oncol Pharm Pract ; : 10781552231178686, 2023 May 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20244139

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With rising rates of complementary and alternative medicine use, the exploration of complementary and alternative medicine integration into oncology treatments is becoming increasingly prevalent. Vitamin B compounds including B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, and B12, have all been proposed as potentially beneficial in cancer prevention and treatment as well as side effect management; however, many studies contain contradicting evidence regarding the utility of B vitamins within oncology. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Vitamin B supplementation in the oncology setting. DESIGN: A systematic review was conducted following The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Scoping Reviews guidelines, using pre-specified search terms in PubMed to include randomized control trials, clinical trials, and case studies. Two reviewers independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and full-text articles for inclusion, with a third reviewer resolving conflicts, before the included articles underwent data extraction and quality appraisal. Data extraction was conducted through COVIDENCE, which was used to manage and track the data during the search process. RESULTS: Out of 694 articles initially identified, 25 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Designs of the studies varied, including randomized control trials, clinical trials, and case/cohort studies. The impact of vitamin supplementation on cancer risk varied. Several studies found that certain B vitamin supplementation lowered cancer risk: B9 and B6 in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (n = 1200 patients) and in pancreatic cancer (n = 258 patients); B3 in hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 494,860 patients); B6 in breast cancer (n = 27,853 patients); and B9 in BRCA1-positive breast cancer (n = 400 patients). However, some studies found that certain B vitamin supplementation increased the risk or negative outcomes of cancer: B6 during nasopharyngeal carcinoma treatment (n = 592 patients); B6 in risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 494,860 patients); and B9 plasma levels in breast cancer (n = 164 patients). Due to the many adverse effects that occur in cancer treatment, the effectiveness of Vitamin B supplementation in alleviating adverse effects was evaluated. In two separate studies, Vitamin B6 and Vitamin B12 supplementation with acupuncture was found to be effective as adjunct therapies aimed to reduce chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (n = 23 patients and n = 104 patients, respectively). No significant findings were established regarding B vitamin supplementation in chemotherapy-induced hand-foot syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review we concluded that B vitamin supplements have varying data regarding safety and efficacy in cancer. Taking into account the etiology of the cancer, the specific B-vitamin, and the presence of any side effects could help guide utilization of the data found in this review. Large, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings among various cancer diagnoses and stages. Given the widespread utilization of supplements, healthcare providers should understand the safety and efficacy of vitamin B supplementation to address questions that arise in caring for those with cancer.

2.
Pharmacy (Basel) ; 11(2)2023 Feb 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2271934

ABSTRACT

Given the complexities surrounding vaccine acceptance of COVID-19 and other vaccines, it is important to determine the underlying health beliefs of patients in order to bridge gaps and promote vaccine confidence. With pharmacies as key hubs for vaccinations and vaccine conversations, examining patient perspectives through the lens of community pharmacy may provide a targeted insight into their patient populations. The primary objectives of this study were to measure COVID-19 vaccine intention and compare vaccine acceptance at pharmacies and clinics between California and Ohio. The secondary objectives included subgroup comparisons of vaccine intention and vaccine acceptance based on demographic characteristics. A previously validated survey instrument (5C survey tool) was administered at pharmacy sites in California and Ohio to examine respondents' vaccine acceptance (confidence, complacency, constrains, calculation, and collective responsibility). Additional items were added to capture flu and COVID-19 vaccine intention. Reliability and confirmatory factor analysis were completed for the 13-item 5C. Comparisons were made between sites and within different demographic groups. Good reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.768) was found, with nearly all items loading on their hypothesized domains. Respondents from Ohio had significantly higher complacency and constraints domain scores. Highest acceptance was revealed in females, individuals with a Master's degree or higher, and individuals with the intention to receive a flu vaccine. The adapted 5C is a reasonable tool to measure vaccine intention in English-speaking populations in the US. Certain demographic groups may have lower vaccine acceptance; pharmacists could consider implementing a tool, such as the 5C tool, to identify low acceptance. Given that the 5C tool gathers information on different domains of vaccine acceptance, healthcare professionals could utilize these results to improve trust and vaccine confidence in their patient populations; focused conversations concerning any of the respective domains could best address individual concerns and barriers about vaccinations, notably the COVID-19 and flu vaccines.

3.
J Am Coll Clin Pharm ; 5(6): 590-598, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1797875

ABSTRACT

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted daily routines for a majority of the population, with implications for their health behaviors. Racial and ethnic minorities have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. The novel COVID-19 Behavioral Questionnaire (CoBQ) was developed in Fall 2020 to provide a means to measure the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the United States population. The study utilized behavioral domains to determine which demographic groups reported that they were made the most vulnerable during Fall-Winter 2020-2021 of the pandemic. Objectives: The study aimed to further validate and test the CoBQ in varied US regions and compare the scores obtained from three states, California, Ohio, and Illinois. Methods: A prospective, multi-site survey-based study was designed to further validate and test the 17-item CoBQ in varied populations. Respondents included patients on routine visits at each pharmacy or clinical site who agreed to complete the survey online via Qualtrics. Data analyses included descriptive statistics, psychometric testing, and comparison of groups using Analysis of Variance. Results: Completed surveys (n = 507) between October 2021 and March 2021 were analyzed. Respondents were mostly female, white, and had some college education. The CoBQ showed improved reliability compared with previous testing and strong construct validity through factor analysis. Overall scores were similar between three states. The most impacted groups included those who reported within the 18-49 age group, a yearly household income <$50 000, or education up to high school. Conclusions: The CoBQ is the first validated tool to measure the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on health behaviors. Results could serve as a baseline to address the most vulnerable patient groups and support identified behavioral needs during a similar pandemic situation.

4.
Res Social Adm Pharm ; 17(1): 1903-1907, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-759318

ABSTRACT

Across the globe, pharmacists on the frontline continue to fight COVID-19 and its continuously evolving physical, mental, and economic consequences armed by their knowledge, professionalism, and dedication. Their need for credible scientific evidence to inform their practice has never been more urgent. Despite the exponentially increasing number of publications since the start of the pandemic, questions remain unanswered, and more are created, than have been resolved by the increasing number of publications. A panel of leading journal editors was convened by the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) Pharmacy Practice Research Special Interest Group to discuss the current status of COVID-19 related research, provide their recommendations, and identify focal points for pharmacy practice, social pharmacy, and education research moving forward. Key priorities identified spanned a wide range of topics, reflecting the need for good quality research to inform practice and education. The panel insisted that a foundation in theory and use of rigorous methods should continue forming the basis of inquiry and its resultant papers, regardless of topic area. From assessing the clinical and cost effectiveness of COVID-19 therapies and vaccines to assessing different models of pharmaceutical services and education delivery, these priorities will ensure that our practice is informed by the best quality scientific evidence at this very challenging time.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pharmaceutical Services/organization & administration , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Pharmacy Research/organization & administration , Humans , Professional Role , Professionalism
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL