Consumer perception, knowledge, and uses of cannabidiol.

Introduction: The legalization of cannabidiol (CBD) across the United States, in varying degrees, has made CBD easily accessible to consumers for complementary and medical purposes. However, there is a paucity of scientific evidence on the benefits and risks of commercially available CBD. In the literature, 2 studies have gathered consumer perceptions and attitudes on cannabis products, specifically CBD, using survey-based questionnaires. This study aimed to build on the aforementioned studies in obtaining consumer perception and knowledge of CBD products using a national survey-based questionnaire. Methods: Respondents were recruited through an anonymous, nationwide, online survey administered through Qualtrics in the United States from March 28 to April 30, 2021. The survey consisted of demographics, perceived efficacy and safety of CBD, and resources to obtain CBD information. The survey responses were reported using descriptive statistics along with median and interquartile range for the Likert portion. Results: A total of 1158 respondents accessed the survey. The median age was 43 and 50% of respondents were female. The uses for CBD included neurological disorders, pulmonary conditions, gastrointestinal disorders, and chronic pain. The most commonly reported safety concern related to taking CBD was anxiety. Participants agreed that CBD is safe when used responsibly for medical use, and social media was the main source used to obtain information about CBD. Discussion: Respondents who used CBD for a condition thought it was helpful; however, most of the adverse effects were rated as moderate to severe, requiring medical attention from a health care professional, hospital, or emergency room visit.

Improving health equity: Evaluation of accessible written medication information for patients with visual impairment.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are limited options for patients with visual impairment or blindness to obtain accessible written medication information. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the availability of accessible medication guides provided by the manufacturer and identify common barriers reported by patients with visual impairment in obtaining accessible written medication information in health care settings. DESIGN: Prospective, cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants of the survey portion included individuals with visual impairment who were administered an online questionnaire. OUTCOME MEASURES: Availability of accessible medication guides as verified by 39 manufacturers and accessibility assessed using a checklist based on revised Section 508 guidelines and testing with a screen reader for accessibility. To identify barriers in obtaining written medication information, respondents were recruited by Qualtrics to fill out an anonymous, online 13-question survey from September to October 2022. RESULTS: All manufacturers did not provide an accessible medication guide or an alternative format. Common errors found by the screen reader were lack of a description for images (alternative text) and headings were not available to help with navigation. As for the survey, a total of 699 participants responded. The median age was 35 years and 49% of respondents were female. A paper copy was the most common format (38%) provided in the pharmacy and barriers identified included lack of Braille or electronic options and personnel not equipped to serve patients with visual impairment. CONCLUSION: With the lack of accessible written medication information as a barrier to health equity, pharmacists and manufacturers need to provide alternative formats such as audio, electronic formats, or Braille to patients with visual impairment.

Accessibility of drug databases and resources with assistive technology.

INTRODUCTION: Pharmacy programs are responsible for providing appropriate academic accommodations to student learners in the classroom including individuals with disabilities according to Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education Accreditation Standards. COMMENTARY: In the literature, faculty have published methods on teaching strategies and assistive technologies to increase accessibility in a laboratory setting and implementation of resources for learners with visual or hearing impairment. An area that has not been highlighted in the literature is the accessibility of drug databases and resources often utilized in pharmacy practice and is an integral part of pharmacy curricula. This commentary provides information about the accessibility of the content and features within drug databases and resources using assistive technology for individuals with visual impairment. IMPLICATIONS: Pharmacy programs must conduct testing of software and drug resources commonly used to ensure appropriate accommodations are provided for learners with disabilities. In addition, external stakeholders who develop drug information resources may need to consider accessibility of content for student learners with visual impairment and other forms of disability.

The accuracy and completeness of drug information in Google snippet blocks.

INTRODUCTION: Consumers commonly use the Internet for immediate drug information. In 2014, Google introduced the snippet block to programmatically search available websites to answer a question entered into the search engine without the need for the user to enter any websites. This study compared the accuracy and completeness of drug information found in Google snippet blocks to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) medication guides. METHODS: Ten outpatient drugs were selected from the 2018 Clinical Drugstats Database Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Six questions in the medication guide for each drug were entered into the Google search engine to find the snippet block. The accuracy and completeness of drug information in the Google snippet block were quantified by two different pharmacists using a scoring system of 1 (less than 25% accurate/complete information) to 5 (100% accurate/complete information). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the scores. RESULTS: For five out of the six questions, the information in the Google snippets had less than 50% accuracy and completeness compared to the medication guides. The average accuracy and completeness scores of the Google snippets were highest for "What are the ingredients of [the drug]?" with scores of 3.38 (51-75%) and 3.00 (51-75%), respectively. The question on "How to take [drug]?" had the lowest score with averages of 1.00 (<25%) for both accuracy and completeness. CONCLUSION: Google snippets provide inaccurate and incomplete drug information when compared to FDA-approved drug medication guides. This aspect may cause patient harm; therefore, it is imperative for health care and health information professionals to provide reliable drug resources to patients and consumers if written information may be needed.

The Drug Manufacturer as a Drug Information Resource.

Pharmacists use a myriad of drug resources for patient care; however, the drug manufacturer is often overlooked and underutilized as a resource for drug information. Pharmaceutical companies have a medical information department that is responsible for providing drug information to pharmacists and the public about the company's products. This article will explain the purpose and functions of the medical information department within a pharmaceutical company. In addition, the type of information that may be requested and the ways to request drug information will be discussed.

The role of a pharmacist as a medical information specialist in the pharmaceutical industry.

INTRODUCTION: The literature has limited information on pharmacists working in the alternate career path of a medical information specialist in the pharmaceutical industry. The purpose of this study was to gather the background, functions, and skills of pharmacists working in the role of a medical information specialist (MIS) and their preparation for the role through their pharmacy education. METHODS: An electronic survey was sent to medical information departments and obtained information on educational background, prior job experience, and skills required for the MIS role. The survey also asked for suggestions on how pharmacy schools can prepare students for this role. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 40 medical information departments from September to December 2017 and a total of 33 pharmacists responded. Approximately half of the responders did not complete post graduate training. The role of a MIS includes answering medical information questions and collecting adverse events and product complaints. Skills rated as important to the role as a MIS were communication skills, medical writing, and literature evaluation. Four pharmacists thought their pharmacy education definitely prepared them for role in medical information. The pharmacists suggested pharmacy curriculum focus more on drug information skills, structure of the pharmaceutical industry, and providing opportunities to improve emotional intelligence and critical thinking. CONCLUSION: The information collected in this survey can provide valuable insight for students interested in this career path. In addition, pharmacy schools may include more opportunities during the didactic and experiential years to help prepare students for this alternate career path.