Self-medication practices to prevent or manage COVID-19: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have assessed the prevalence and characteristics of self-medication in COVID-19. However, no systematic review has summarized their findings. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to assess the prevalence of self-medication to prevent or manage COVID-19. METHODS: We used different keywords and searched studies published in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, two preprint repositories, Google, and Google Scholar. We included studies that reported original data and assessed self-medication to prevent or manage COVID-19. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) modified for cross-sectional studies. RESULTS: We identified eight studies, all studies were cross-sectional, and only one detailed the question used to assess self-medication. The recall period was heterogeneous across studies. Of the eight studies, seven assessed self-medication without focusing on a specific symptom: four performed in the general population (self-medication prevalence ranged between <4% to 88.3%) and three in specific populations (range: 33.9% to 51.3%). In these seven studies, the most used medications varied widely, including antibiotics, chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine, acetaminophen, vitamins or supplements, ivermectin, and ibuprofen. The last study only assessed self-medication for fever due to COVID-19. Most studies had a risk of bias in the "representativeness of the sample" and "assessment of outcome" items of the NOS. CONCLUSIONS: Studies that assessed self-medication for COVID-19 found heterogeneous results regarding self-medication prevalence and medications used. More well-designed and adequately reported studies are warranted to assess this topic.

Why are self-medication opportunities limited in Austria? An interview study and comparison with other countries.

BACKGROUND: Austria has high health resource use compared to similar countries. Reclassifying (switching) medicines from prescription to non-prescription can reduce pressure on health resources and aid timely access to medicines. Since Austria is less progressive in this area than many other countries, this research aimed to elucidate enablers and barriers to it reclassifying medicines and make recommendations for change in the context of similar research conducted elsewhere. METHODS: Qualitative research using a heuristic approach was conducted in Austria in 2018. Informed by their own "insider" and "outsider" knowledge, the authors identified themes from personal interviews with 24 participants, including reclassification committee members, government officials and stakeholders, before comparing these themes with earlier research findings. RESULTS: Significant barriers to reclassification included committee conservatism, minimal political support, medical negativity and few company applications. Insufficient transparency about committee decisions, expectations of adverse committee decisions and a limited market discouraged company applications. Austria's 'social partnership' arrangement and consensus decision making aided a conservative approach, but the regulator and an alternative non-committee switch process were enabling. Pharmacy showed mixed interest in reclassification. Suggested improvements include increasing transparency, committee composition changes, encouraging a more evidence-based approach by the committee, more pharmacy undergraduate clinical training, and companies using scientific advisory meetings and submitting high quality applications. CONCLUSION: Removing barriers to reclassification would facilitate non-prescription availability of medicines and encourage self-care, and could reduce pressure on healthcare resources.

Assessment of self-medication practices in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak in Togo.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no effective treatment for COVID-19, which is a pandemic disease, caused by a novel coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2. In Togo, where four in five people practice self-medication, the absence of a cure for COVID-19 and the constant progression of the disease requires an assessment of self-medication patterns in the context of the pandemic. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of self-medication to prevent COVID-19 and its associated factors in Lomé, Togo. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Lomé, the capital city of Togo, from April 23rd to May 8th, 2020, with a sample of participants from five sectors: the healthcare, air transport, police, road transport and informal sectors. The participants were invited to provide information about their self-medication practices to prevent COVID-19 in the 2 weeks preceding the survey. RESULTS: A total of 955 participants (71.6% men) with a median age of 36 (IQR 32-43) were included. Approximately 22.1% were in the air transport sector, 20.5% were in the police sector, and 38.7% were in the health sector. The overall prevalence of self-medication to prevent COVID-19 was 34.2% (95% CI: 31.2-37.3%). The most commonly used products were vitamin C (27.6%) and traditional medicine (10.2%). Only 2.0% of participants reported using chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine. Female sex (aOR=1.90; p< 0.001), work in the health sector (aOR=1.89; p= 0.001), secondary education level (aOR= 2.28; p= 0.043) and university education level (aOR= 5.11; p< 0.001) were associated with self-medication. CONCLUSION: One-third of the individuals in high-risk populations in Lomé practiced self-medication. Intensifying awareness campaigns is crucial to fight misinformation about alleged COVID-19 prevention products on social media.

Online availability of fish antibiotics and documented intent for self-medication.

Self-medication and antibiotic utilization without healthcare oversight may lead to delayed appropriate treatment, transmission of communicable infections, untoward adverse events, and contribute to antimicrobial resistance. Previous data suggest people obtain over-the-counter (OTC) animal antibiotics for their personal use. This study examined the availability of OTC fish antibiotics online and the documented intent for self-medication. The authors conducted a web-based cross-sectional study using Google search engine to identify vendor websites selling fish antibiotics in the United States. Vendor websites were included if product information, consumer reviews, and comments were publicly available. Nine fish antibiotics were chosen due to their possibility of having consequences to human misuse. The cost and availability of fish antibiotics was recorded. The proportion of reviews and comments related to human consumption was calculated. Consumer review traffic based on "likes" and "dislikes" received was compared between human- and non-human consumption-related reviews. Selected fish antibiotics were purchased and evaluated for physical appearance and compared to FDA-approved available equivalents. We found 24 website vendors with online ordering available for OTC fish antibiotics. Cost varied significantly by antibiotic and quantity ranging from USD $8.99 to $119.99. There were 2,288 reviews documented for the 9 selected antibiotics being sold. Among consumer reviews, 2.4% were potentially associated with human consumption. Human consumption-related reviews constituted 30.2% of all "likes" received and 37.5% of all "dislikes" received. Human consumption-related reviews received an average of 9.2 likes compared to 0.52 likes for non-human consumption-related reviews. The 8 fish antibiotics purchased were consistent with FDA-approved equivalents in physical appearance. Although infrequent, antibiotics intended for fish use are being purchased online without a prescription for self-medication to circumvent professional medical care. Reviews related to human consumption generate significant online traffic compared to reviews unrelated to human consumption.

The COVID-19 cannabis health study: Results from an epidemiologic assessment of adults who use cannabis for medicinal reasons in the United States.

Background: Clinical indications for medicinal cannabis include chronic conditions; thus users (MCUs) are at an increased risk of morbidity and mortality resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19). The study aimed to provide data on cannabis use and self-reported behavioral changes among MCUs with preexisting chronic conditions in response to the pandemic.Methods: An internet-based questionnaire was administered to adults ≥18 who self-reported medicinal cannabis use within the past year. Data are from respondents between March 21 and April 23, 2020; response rate was 83.3%. Health conditions and cannabis frequency, route, and patterns of use were assessed via the COVID-19 Cannabis Health Questionnaire (Vidot et al. 2020).Results: Participants (N = 1202) were predominantly non-Hispanic white (82.5%) and 52.0% male (mean age 47.2 years). Mental health (76.7%), pain (43.7%), cardiometabolic (32.9%), respiratory (16.8%), and autoimmune (12.2%) conditions were most reported. Those with mental health conditions reported increased medicinal cannabis use by 91% since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic compared to those with no mental health conditions (adjusted odds ratio: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.38-2.65). 6.8% reported suspected COVID-19 symptoms. Two percent (2.1%) have been tested for COVID-19 with only 1 positive test result. Some MCUs (16%) changed their route of cannabis administration, switching to nonsmoking forms.Conclusions: The majority of MCUs reported at least one preexisting chronic health condition. Over half report fear of COVID-19 diagnosis and giving the virus to someone else; yet only some switched from smoking to nonsmoking forms of cannabis. Clinicians may consider asking about cannabis use among their patients, particularly those with chronic health conditions.