Establishment of a children's Drugs and Therapeutics Committee to ensure evidence-based and cost-effective medical treatment for children.

The prevalence of undocumented medical treatments among children is a significant issue, as well as many EU countries lack access to newly developed children-friendly medicines. Consequently, there is a pressing need for supplementary resources that can facilitate informed decision-making regarding children's medication. We therefore aim to describe the process of establishing a children's Drug and Therapeutics Committee (cDTC), as well as the preparing and implementation of recommendations for children in the capital region of Denmark. Following the guidelines outlined by the World Health Organization, we established a cDTC, and recommendations for paediatric medication practice were constructed from assessments of medication use patterns among children in the capital region between 2019 and 2021. The recommendations were meticulously crafted based on evaluation of the current marketing authorization landscape and existing best available evidence. In 2019, the capital region established the first cDTC supported by expert councils and an editorial board. A total of 2429 purchase item numbers covering 1 222 846 defined daily doses and 592 088 purchased packages covering 10 200 000 defined daily doses were identified in the secondary and primary sectors, respectively. Three comprehensive lists covering recommendations for newborns and children were published between 2021 and 2020 totaling 331 recommended pharmaceutical products. The recommendations primarily intended for use in the secondary healthcare sector were implemented through the revision of 38 paediatric- and six neonatal product ranges throughout capital region. In conclusion, recommendation lists for children governed by a cDTC provide a rational auxiliary tool that can be immediately implemented in the clinic.

Definition of and delimitation of polyfarmaci.

At present, there is no clear and universal definition of polypharmacy. This review summarises the most common definitions and discusses the challenges in finding one suitable definition. Most of the literature has defined polypharmacy as the simultaneous use of five or more drugs. It is known that polypharmacy can lead to an increased risk of adverse health outcomes. However, a lot of medicine is not necessarily too much medicine. Preferentially, a definition should therefore differentiate between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy. As a universal definition has not yet been established, it is important to consider the definition used in the literature describing polypharmacy.

Co-Developing Patient-Centered Information: A Focus Group Study of Asthma Patients' Preferences and Attitudes towards New Medical Treatment Guidelines.

Studies have suggested patient involvement as an important factor when seeking to improve patient-centered information. The objective of this study was to explore asthma patients' preferences regarding information when co-developing patient-centered information and how they evaluate the material as a supportive initiative when they are deciding whether to switch to the new MART approach. The study was performed as a case study involving qualitative semi-structured focus group interviews inspired by the theoretical framework for supporting patient involvement in research. Two focus group interviews were held, with a total of nine interviewees. Three main interview themes were found: the identification of important topics about the new MART approach, feedback on the design and the preferred implementation of written patient-centered information. The asthma patients preferred written patient-centered material to be short and to be presented briefly at the local community pharmacy, and then discussed more thoroughly with their general practitioner (GP) at a consultation. In conclusion, this study identified asthma patients' preferences when co-developing written patient-centered information and how the patients favored the material to be implemented as a support to them in their decision on whether to change asthma treatment.

A Shift in Asthma Treatment According to New Guidelines: An Evaluation of Asthma Patients' Attitudes towards Treatment Change.

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) has presented a shift in pharmacological asthma treatment. The objective of this study was to explore factors influencing a successful switch to a new asthma treatment approach with a focus on asthma patients' attitudes toward treatment change and supportive initiatives. This study was performed as a case study involving a quantitative questionnaire and a qualitative semi-structured interview. A total of 284 responses were collected from the questionnaire, and 141 responses were included. The results showed that asthma patients thought that effectiveness of the new treatment approach, doctor recommendation, and knowledge of the new treatment approach were the most important factors influencing treatment change considerations. Nine interviews were conducted where the main themes were barriers to a shift in asthma treatment, such as effects and side effects of the new treatment, the role of the general practitioner (GP) and conflicts in agreeing on a treatment plan; as well as facilitators to a shift in asthma treatment, such as trust in the GP and easier inhaler use. We found several supportive initiatives, such as consultation with the GP, handing out information leaflets and a consultation at the pharmacy. In conclusion, this study uniquely identified factors that may influence successful treatment shifts in asthma patients that may be instrumental in understanding similar situations in other pharmacological settings.