Google Scholar versus PubMed in locating primary literature to answer drug-related questions.

BACKGROUND: Google Scholar linked more visitors to biomedical journal Web sites than did PubMed after the database's initial release; however, its usefulness in locating primary literature articles is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess in both databases the availability of primary literature target articles; total number of citations; availability of free, full-text journal articles; and number of primary literature target articles retrieved by year within the first 100 citations of the search results. METHODS: Drug information question reviews published in The Annals of Pharmacotherapy Drug Information Rounds column served as targets to determine the retrieval ability of Google Scholar and PubMed searches. Reviews printed in this column from January 2006 to June 2007 were eligible for study inclusion. Articles were chosen if at least 2 key words of the printed article were included in the PubMed Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) database, and these terms were searched in both databases. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 33 (67%) eligible Drug Information Rounds articles met the inclusion criteria. The median number of primary literature articles used in each of these articles was 6.5 (IQR 4.8, 8.3; mean +/- SD 8 +/- 5.4). No significant differences were found for the mean number of target primary literature articles located within the first 100 citations in Google Scholar and PubMed searches (5.1 +/- 3.9 vs 5.3 +/- 3.3; p = 0.868). Google Scholar searches located more total results than PubMed (2211.6 +/- 3999.5 vs 44.2 +/- 47.4; p = 0.019). The availability of free, full-text journal articles per Drug Information Rounds article was similar between the databases (1.8 +/- 1.7 vs 2.3 +/- 1.7; p = 0.325). More primary literature articles published prior to 2000 were located with Google Scholar searches compared with PubMed (62.8% vs 34.9%; p = 0.017); however, no statistically significant differences between the databases were observed for articles published after 2000 (66.4 vs 77.1; p = 0.074). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were identified in the number of target primary literature articles located between databases. PubMed searches yielded fewer total citations than Google Scholar results; however, PubMed appears to be more specific than Google Scholar for locating relevant primary literature articles.

Preparing students for community pharmacy practice during a drug information advanced practice experience.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether students completing an advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) at an academic-affiliated drug information center received questions similar to those received by pharmacists practicing in community settings. METHODS: Graduates of Samford University McWhorter School of Pharmacy residing in Southeastern states were surveyed via US mail to determine the characteristics of inquiries received from health care providers and the public in community practice. Survey results were compared to inquiries received at Samford University Global Drug Information Center (SUGDIS). RESULTS: The response rate to the survey of graduates was 36% (268 of 738 surveys). Respondents identified nonprescription drugs (65%), adverse drug reactions (62.7%), and drug interactions (62.4%) as the top 3 types of questions answered routinely in community practice, while drug therapy (13.9%), dosing (10.2%), and adverse drug reactions (6.5%) were the 3 types of questions most commonly answered at SUGDIS. The most common resources used to answer questions in the community and SUGDIS were Drug Facts and Comparisons and specialty references, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Differences were noted in types of questions received, expected speed of response, and reference utilization. As a result, activities were incorporated into the drug information APPE to address the disparities noted in the study.

Survey of care provided by ambulatory care pharmacists to patients with chronic kidney disease.

PURPOSE: A survey was conducted to determine the role of ambulatory care pharmacists in the care of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: Data from a survey of ambulatory care pharmacists in the treatment and management of patients with CKD were collected. A 22-item anonymous survey was sent to 1028 potential respondents in January 2004. Only pharmacists indicating routine provision of care to patients with risk factors for the development of CKD or with stages 1-4 of CKD were included in the analysis. Additional questions surveyed the timeliness and frequency of nephrology referrals and the pharmacists' familiarity with National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-K/DOQI) guidelines. RESULTS: Of 1028 surveys, 535 were completed and returned. Only respondents who provided care in an outpatient setting to geriatric patients and patients with diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or decreased creatinine clearance were included in the analysis (n = 388). Initial assessment of CKD was performed by 85% of the surveyed pharmacists. Over one third of the pharmacists made nephrology referrals. However, even pharmacists who had a high percentage of patients with a known risk for CKD infrequently screened for kidney dysfunction, and only a small portion monitored the areas recommended by NFK-K/DOQI. The respondents' familiarity with the NFK-K/DOQI guidelines indicated that 7% were very familiar, 45% were somewhat familiar, 34% were not very familiar, 13% were not at all familiar, and 1% did not respond. CONCLUSION: The ambulatory care pharmacists surveyed were not consistently involved in the routine monitoring of common complications of CKD.

Intensive lipid-lowering therapy in patients with coronary heart disease.

OBJECTIVE: To describe current data evaluating the use of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in patients with coronary heart disease. DATA SOURCES: A literature search using MEDLINE (1966-September 2004) was conducted using the search terms lipoproteins, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors, coronary arteriosclerosis, and coronary disease to identify published trials comparing the effects of intensive and conventional lipid-lowering therapy. DATA SYNTHESIS: Intensive lipid-lowering therapy reduces LDL-C levels significantly more than conventional treatment and appears to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients who have recently experienced acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, evidence suggesting clinical benefits in patients with stable coronary heart disease is currently lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Although data are limited, patients with ACS may benefit from intensive lipid-lowering therapy. Several studies are underway to determine the appropriate role of intensive lipid-lowering therapy.