Self-reported clinical pharmacy service provision in Austria: an analysis of both the community and hospital pharmacy sector-a national study.

Background With expansion of more advanced clinical roles for pharmacists we need to be mindful that the extent to which clinical pharmacy services are implemented varies from one country to another. To date no comprehensive assessment of number and types of services provided by either community or hospital pharmacies in Austria exists. Objective To analyse and describe the number and types of clinical pharmacy services provided in both community and hospital pharmacies, as well as the level of clinical pharmacy education of pharmacists across Austria. Setting Austrian community and hospital pharmacies. Method An electronic questionnaire to determine number and types of clinical pharmacy services provided was send to all chief pharmacists at all community (n = 1365) and hospital pharmacies (n = 40) across Austria. Besides current and future services provision, education and training provision were also assessed. Main outcome measure Extent of and attitude towards CPS in Austria. Results Response rates to the surveys were 19.1% (n = 261/1365) in community and 92.5% (n = 37/40) in hospital pharmacies. 59.0% and 89.2% of community and hospital pharmacies, respectively, indicated that the provision of clinical pharmacy services in Austria has increased substantially over the past 10 years. Fifty-one percent of community pharmacies reported to provide a medication review service, while 97.3% of hospitals provide a range of services. Only 18.0% of community pharmacies offer services other than medication review services at dispensing. Binary regressions show that provision of already established medication management is a predictor for the willingness of community pharmacists to extend the range of CPS (p < 0.01), while completed training in the area of clinical pharmacy is not (p > 0.05). More hospital than community pharmacists have postgraduate education in clinical pharmacy (17.4% vs 6.5%). A desire to complete postgraduate education was shown by 28.3% of community and 14.7% of hospital pharmacists. Lack of time, inadequate remuneration, lack of resources and poor relationship between pharmacists and physicians were highlighted as barriers. Conclusion Both community and hospital pharmacists show strong willingness to expand their service provision and will need continued support, such as improved legislative structures, more supportive resources and practice focused training opportunities, to further these services.

Efficacy and safety of vildagliptin in new-onset diabetes after kidney transplantation--a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

New-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) is a serious complication after kidney transplantation, but therapeutic strategies remain underexplored. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors selectively foster insulin secretion without inducing hypoglycemia, which might be advantageous in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with NODAT. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial to assess safety and efficacy of the DPP-4 inhibitor vildagliptin. Intraindividual differences in oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)-derived 2-h plasma glucose (2HPG) from baseline to 3 months after treatment served as primary endpoint. Among secondary outcomes, we evaluated HbA1c, metabolic and safety parameters, as well as OGTTs at 1 month after drug discontinuation. Of 509 stable KTRs who were screened in our outpatient clinic, 63 (12.4%) had 2HPG ≥ 200 mg/dL, 33 of them were randomized and 32 completed the study. In the vildagliptin group 2HPG and HbA1c were profoundly reduced in comparison to placebo (vildagliptin: 2HPG = 182.7 mg/dL, HbA1c = 6.1%; placebo: 2HPG = 231.2 mg/dL, HbA1c = 6.5%; both p ≤ 0.05), and statistical significance was achieved for the primary endpoint (vildagliptin: 2HPG-difference -73.7 ± 51.3 mg/dL; placebo: -5.7 ± 41.4 mg/dL; p < 0.01). Adverse events were generally mild and occurred at similar rates in both groups. In conclusion, DPP-4 inhibition in KTRs with overt NODAT was safe and efficient, providing a novel treatment alternative for this specific form of diabetes.

Clinical pharmacy services and solid organ transplantation: a literature review.

AIM OF THE REVIEW: Organ transplantation represents the therapy of choice for most types of end-stage organ failure, and post-transplant patient care warrants great attention. The aim of this study was to summarise the available evidence regarding the role and impact of clinical pharmacy services in the care of solid organ transplant patients. METHODS: A search of the literature was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and IPA databases to identify studies relevant to our investigation of the impact of clinical pharmacists' interventions. RESULTS: Only five out of nineteen of the included studies were randomised controlled trials; eleven studies were descriptive, and three were before-after studies. Interventions performed in these studies consisted of routine clinical pharmacy services with a focus on identifying, resolving and preventing drug-related problems; clinical pharmacy services with a focus on therapeutic drug monitoring; and those with a focus on compliance enhancement and educational interventions. The number and type of interventions and the physicians' acceptance rates were assessed in the majority of the included studies. Acceptance rates were generally above 95%, and most studies reported that clinical pharmacy services had a positive impact on the care of solid organ transplant patients. Positive perceptions of patients and health care professionals are also reported. In two of the studies, patients' compliance rates and drug knowledge were assessed following counselling by a pharmacist. Dosing-related interventions were the most common interventions proposed. Immunosuppressants, cardiovascular drugs and antimicrobials were the drug classes most affected by the clinical pharmacists' interventions. CONCLUSIONS: High quality evidence that supports the benefit of clinical pharmacy services in the care of solid organ transplant patients is rare. Nevertheless, all of the included studies showed that clinical pharmacy services had a positive impact. Furthermore, all included studies showed that patients and physicians appreciated clinical pharmacists. The various outcome measures used in these studies were improved by interactions with clinical pharmacists. More randomised controlled trials are needed to contribute to the paucity of the existing evidence.