Outpatients' Opinion And Experience Regarding Telepharmacy During The COVID-19 Pandemic: The Enopex Project.

BACKGROUND: Telepharmacy, as a remote pharmaceutical care procedure, is being used worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim of preserving the health of patients and professionals. Its future development should incorporate the assessment of patient perception, but no research study has investigated it. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to poll the opinions and experiences of outpatients with telepharmacy through a purpose-developed questionnaire and to assess it's quality through an internal validity and reliability analysis. METHODS: Cross-sectional observational study of adult patients who used telepharmacy services during the COVID-19 lockdown period in Spain. The subjects answered a 24-item questionnaire, after giving their informed consent. Place of delivery, informed pharmacotherapeutic follow-up, opinion about telepharmacy, future development, ethics/satisfaction, and coordination constituted the six questionnaire categories. After assessing the adequate sample size with the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test, the Bartlett sphericity test analyzed the validity of the questionnaire. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient calculations verified the reliability and internal consistency. RESULTS: A total of 9442 interviews were administered to patients from 81 hospitals, of which 8079 were valid (52.8% female). A 54.1% were aged between 41-65 years; 42.7% had been in treatment for more than 5 years; 42.8% lived between 6-31 miles from the hospital. As many as 96.7% of patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with telepharmacy, 97.5% considering it complementary to their usual follow-up; 55.9% expressed a preference for being followed up face to face when visiting the hospital. 75.6% said they had rather receive their medication at home. The sample size obtained was deemed appropriate [the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test (0.789) and Bartlett's sphericity test (p<0.005)]. The reliability analysis resulted in a Cronbach α = 0.7. CONCLUSION: Patients have shown high satisfaction with telepharmacy and the ENOPEX questionnaire is a tool with sufficient validity and reliability to be used in the evaluation of the care that patients receive through telepharmacy.

Drug-drug interactions between treatment specific pharmacotherapy and concomitant medication in patients with COVID-19 in the first wave in Spain.

Primary aim was to assess prevalence and severity of potential and real drug-drug interactions (DDIs) among therapies for COVID-19 and concomitant medications in hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The secondary aim was to analyze factors associated with rDDIs. An observational single center cohort study conducted at a tertiary hospital in Spain from March 1st to April 30th. rDDIs refer to interaction with concomitant drugs prescribed during hospital stay whereas potential DDIs (pDDIs) refer to those with domiciliary medication. DDIs checked with The University of Liverpool resource. Concomitant medications were categorized according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system. Binomial logistic regression was carried out to identify factors associated with rDDIs. A total of 174 patients were analyzed. DDIs were detected in 152 patients (87.4%) with a total of 417 rDDIs between COVID19-related drugs and involved hospital concomitant medication (60 different drugs) while pDDIs were detected in 105 patients (72.9%) with a total of 553 pDDIs. From all 417 rDDIs, 43.2% (n = 180) were associated with lopinavir/ritonavir and 52.9% (n = 221) with hydroxychloroquine, both of them the most prescribed (106 and 165 patients, respectively). The main mechanism of interaction observed was QTc prolongation. Clinically relevant rDDIs were identified among 81.1% (n = 338) ('potential interactions') and 14.6% (n = 61) (contraindicated) of the patients. Charlson index (OR 1.34, 95% IC 1.02-1.76) and number of drugs prescribed during admission (OR 1.42, 95% IC 1.12-1.81) were independently associated with rDDIs. Prevalence of patients with real and pDDIs was high, especially those clinically relevant. Both comorbidities and polypharmacy were found as risk factors independently associated with DDIs development.

Similar incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with rheumatic diseases with and without hydroxychloroquine therapy.

BACKGROUND: Hydroxychloroquine is not efficacious as post-exposure prophylaxis against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is not known whether as pre-exposure prophylaxis it may prevent COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of COVID-19 in Spanish patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases treated with and without hydroxychloroquine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective electronic record review, from February 27th to June 21st, 2020, of patients with autoimmune inflammatory diseases followed at two academic tertiary care hospitals in Seville, Spain. The cumulative incidence of confirmed COVID-19, by PCR or serology, was compared between patients with and without hydroxychloroquine as part of their treatment of autoimmune inflammatory diseases. RESULTS: Among 722 included patients, 290 (40%) were receiving hydroxychloroquine. During the seventeen-week study period, 10 (3.4% [95% CI: 1.7%-6.7%] cases of COVID-19 were registered among patients with hydroxychloroquine and 13 (3.0% [1.6%-5.1%]) (p = 0.565) in those without hydroxychloroquine. COVID-19 was diagnosed by PCR in four (1.4%, 95% CI 0.38%-3.5%) subject with hydroxychloroquine and six (1.4%, 95% CI 0.5%-3.0%) without hydroxychloroquine (p = 0.697). Three patients on hydroxychloroquine and four patients without hydroxychloroquine were admitted to the hospital, none of them required to be transferred to the intensive care unit and no patient died during the episode. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and severity of COVID-19 among patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases with and without hydroxychloroquine was not significantly different.

High rate of major drug-drug interactions of lopinavir-ritonavir for COVID-19 treatment.

The impact of drug-drug interactions (DDI) between ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV-r) to treat patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and commonly used drugs in clinical practice is not well-known. Thus, we evaluated the rate and severity of DDI between LPV-r for COVID-19 treatment and concomitant medications. This was a cross-sectional study including all individuals diagnosed of SARS-CoV-2 infection treated with LPV-r and attended at a single center in Southern Spain (March 1st to April 30th, 2020). The frequency [95% confidence interval (95% CI)] of potential and major DDI were calculated. Overall, 469 patients were diagnosed of COVID-19, 125 (27%) of them were prescribed LPV-r. LPV-r had potential DDI with concomitant medications in 97 (78%, 95% CI 69-85%) patients, and in 33 (26%, 95% CI 19-35%) individuals showed major DDI. Twelve (36%) patients with major DDI and 14 (15%) individuals without major DDI died (p = 0.010). After adjustment, only the Charlson index was independently associated with death [adjusted OR (95% CI) for Charlson index ≥ 5: 85 (10-731), p < 0.001]. LPV-r was discontinued due to side effects in 31 (25%) patients. Management by the Infectious Diseases Unit was associated with a lower likelihood of major DDI [adjusted odds ratio (95% CI): 0.14 (0.04-0.53), p = 0.003). In conclusion, a high frequency of DDI between LPV-r for treating COVID-19 and concomitant medications was found, including major DDI. Patients with major DDI showed worse outcomes, but this association was explained by the older age and comorbidities. Patients managed by the Infectious Diseases Unit had lower risk of major DDI.

Survey on the situation of telepharmacy as applied to the outpatient care in hospital pharmacy departments in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the status of the implementation and development of  telepharmacy as applied to the pharmaceutical care of outpatients treated at  hospital pharmacy services in Spain during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Six weeks after the beginning of the confinement period, an online 10- question survey was sent to all members of the Spanish Society of Hospital  Pharmacists. A single response per hospital was requested. The survey included  questions on the provision of remote pharmaceutical care prior to the onset of  the health crisis, patient selection criteria, procedures for home delivery of  medications and the means used to deliver them, the number of patients who  benefited from telepharmacy, and the number of referrals made. Finally,  respondents were asked whether a teleconsultation was carried out before  sending patients their medication and whether these deliveries were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 39.3% (n = 185) of all the hospitals in the National Health  System (covering all of Spain's autonomous regions) responded to the survey.  Before the beginning of the crisis, 83.2% (n = 154) of hospital pharmacy  services did not carry out remote pharmaceutical care activities that included  telepharmacy with remote delivery of medication. During the study period,  119,972 patients were treated, with 134,142 deliveries of medication being  completed. Most hospitals did not use patient selection criteria. A total of 30.2%  of hospitals selected patients based on their personal circumstances. Home  delivery and informed delivery (87%; 116,129 deliveries) was the option used in most cases. The means used to deliver the medication mainly included the use  of external courier services (47.0%; 87 hospitals) or the hospital's own transport services (38.4%; 71 hospitals). As many as 87.6% of hospitals carried out  teleconsultations prior to sending out medications and 59.6% recorded their  telepharmacy activities in the hospital pharmacy appointments record. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of implementation of telepharmacy in outpatient care in  Spain during the study period in the pandemic was high. This made it possible to guarantee the continuity of care for a large number of patients.

Objetivo: Analizar la situación de la implantación y desarrollo de la telefarmacia aplicada a la atención farmacéutica a pacientes externos de los servicios de  farmacia hospitalaria en España durante la pandemia por la COVID-19.Método: Se envió una encuesta online de 10 preguntas a todos los socios de la  Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria a las seis semanas del inicio del  periodo de confinamiento por la pandemia. Se solicitó una única respuesta por  hospital. Se incluyeron preguntas sobre la realización de atención farmacéutica  no presencial con dispensación a distancia previa al inicio de la crisis sanitaria,  los criterios de selección de pacientes, los procedimientos de envío de  medicación y los medios utilizados, el número de pacientes que se han  beneficiado de la telefarmacia y el número de envíos realizados. Por último, se  identificó la realización o no de teleconsulta previa al envío de medicación y si la  actividad quedó registrada.Resultados: Un 39,3% (n = 185) del total de hospitales públicos del Sistema  Nacional de Salud pertenecientes a todas las comunidades autónomas  respondieron a la encuesta. El 83,2% (n = 154) de los servicios de farmacia  hospitalarios no realizaban actividades de atención farmacéutica no presencial  con telefarmacia que incluyeran envío de medicación antes del inicio de la crisis  sanitaria. En el periodo de estudio se atendieron 119.972 pacientes y se  realizaron 134.142 envíos de medicación. La mayoría de los hospitales no  utilizaron criterios de selección de pacientes. El 30,2% de los centros  seleccionaron en función de las circunstancias personales del paciente. La  dispensación domiciliaria y entrega informada (87%; 116.129 envíos) fue la  opción utilizada de forma mayoritaria para el envío. Los medios para hacer llegar la medicación fueron, principalmente, la mensajería externa (47%; 87 centros) o medios propios del hospital (38,4%; 71 centros). Un 87,6% de los hospitales realizaron teleconsulta previa al envío de medicación y el 59,6% registró la actividad de telefarmacia en la agenda de citación. Conclusiones: La implantación de la telefarmacia aplicada a la atención a  pacientes externos en España durante la pandemia ha sido elevada. Así se ha  podido garantizar la continuidad de los tratamientos de un elevado número de  pacientes.

Pharmaceutical care to hospital outpatients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Telepharmacy.

Hospital Pharmacy Service (HPS) in Spain have been impacted by the health  crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, the outbreak has forced HPSs to adapt their outpatient consultation services to Telepharmacy to optimize clinical  outcomes and reduce the risk of contagion. The purpose of this article is to  describe and analyze the experience of HPSs with outpatient Telepharmacy  during the COVID-19 pandemic and expose the lessons learned. Measures have  been adopted in on-site outpatient pharmacy clinics to prevent exposure of  patients and professionals to the virus. These measures are based on national  and international recommendations on social distancing and hygiene. With  regard to remote outpatient pharmacy services, teleconsultation with drug  dispensing has been promoted based on five basic procedures, each with its  advantages and limitations: home drug delivery from HPSs, with the advantage  of universal access and the limitation of entailing a substantial investment in  resources; HPS coordination with primary care pharmacists, which requires no  investments but with limited access to some geographic areas; HPS coordination with community pharmacists based on a large network of pharmacies, which  requires the patient to go to the pharmacy, without confidentiality being  guaranteed for any patient; geolocation and hospital-based medication  dispensing, which provides universal access and direct traceability, but entails  investment in human resources; and HPS coordination with associations of  patients, which does not entail any additional cost but limits the information  available on the diseases of society members. Three main lessons have been learned during the pandemic: the satisfactory capacity of HPS to provide outpatient pharmacy consultation services in the setting of a public health crisis; the usefulness of Telepharmacy for the clinical follow-up, healthcare coordination, outpatient counseling, and informed dispensing and delivery of  medication (with a high level of satisfaction among patients); and the need to  foster Telepharmacy as a complementary tool through a mixed model of  outpatient pharmacy consultation service that incorporates the advantages of  each procedure and adapts to the individual needs of each patient in a context of humanized healthcare.

Los servicios de farmacia hospitalaria (SFH) en España se han visto afectados  por la crisis sanitaria provocada por SARS-CoV-2 y han tenido que adoptar sus  procedimientos de atención farmacéutica (AF) al paciente externo (PE) mediante estrategias de Telefarmacia, con los objetivos de maximizar los resultados en  salud y reducir el riesgo de contagio. El objetivo de ese artículo es describir y  analizar los procedimientos AFPE durante la pandemia SARS-CoV-2 y comunicar  las lecciones aprendidas en los SFH. En relación con las consultas externas de AF presenciales, se han adoptado medidas para minimizar el contagio viral de  pacientes y profesionales, siguiendo las recomendaciones nacionales e  internacionales de referencia de distanciamiento temporal, espacial y  recomendaciones higiénicas. En cuanto a las consultas externas de AF no  presenciales, se han potenciado las teleconsultas con dispensación del  tratamiento en base a cinco procedimientos básicos, cada uno de ellos con sus  ventajas y limitaciones: dispensación domiciliaria desde SFH que presenta las  ventajas de la universalidad de acceso, pero requiere una elevada inversión en  recursos; coordinación del SHF con farmacéuticos de atención primaria, que  conlleva una nula inversión en recursos, pero limita el acceso a determinadas zonas geográficas; coordinación del SFH con farmacéuticos comunitarios, que  utiliza una amplia red de oficinas de farmacia, pero exige el desplazamiento del  paciente sin garantías de confidencialidad para todos los casos; geolocalización y dispensación hospitalaria, que permite un acceso universal y trazabilidad directa, pero requiere un incremento en recursos humanos; y coordinación del SFH con  asociaciones de pacientes, que no requiere inversión económica, pero limita el  acceso a las patologías de los asociados. Destacamos finalmente tres lecciones  aprendidas: la capacidad de AFPE de SFH españoles ante una crisis sanitaria; la  utilidad de la Telefarmacia para el seguimiento clínico, la coordinación  asistencial, información al PE, dispensación y entrega informada (con elevada  satisfacción de los pacientes); y la necesidad de potenciar la Telefarmacia como herramienta complementaria, en un modelo mixto de AFPE que incorpore las  ventajas de cada uno de los procedimientos adaptándose a las necesidades individuales de los pacientes en un entorno de humanización de la asistencia  sanitaria.