Association of pharmaceutical care barriers and role ambiguity and role conflict of clinical pharmacists.

Objectives: This study aimed to understand current status of pharmaceutical care barriers and explore the impact of them on the role ambiguity and role conflict of clinical pharmacists in secondary and tertiary hospitals in mainland China. Methods: The Chinese version of Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Scale was used to measure clinical pharmacists' role ambiguity and role conflict. A questionnaire for clinical pharmacists' pharmaceutical care barriers was established to determine whether clinical pharmacists encounter barriers. Multiple linear regression model was used to analyze the influence of various pharmaceutical care barriers on the role ambiguity and role conflict of clinical pharmacists. Results: 1,300 clinical pharmacists from 31 provinces were eventually included. The results revealed that commonly perceived barriers to pharmaceutical care by clinical pharmacists include the lack of financial compensation and dedicated time for pharmaceutical care. Barriers such as clinical pharmacists' unawareness of the importance of pharmaceutical care increase the degree of clinical pharmacists' role conflict. And the lack of financial compensation for pharmaceutical care decreases the degree of role ambiguity, while barriers such as the lack of dedicated time for pharmaceutical care, the failure to standardize the service procedures and contents of related documents in healthcare institutions increase the degree of role ambiguity. Conclusion: Increased focus on enhancing financial compensation, responsibility cognition, education and training, and greater consideration of institutional factors could help clinical pharmacists better manage their work environments and provide higher-quality pharmaceutical care.

Mapping health assessment questionnaire disability index onto EQ-5D-5L in China.

Objective: This research aimed to develop the more accurate mapping algorithms from health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-DI) onto EQ-5D-5L based on Chinese Rheumatoid Arthritis patients. Methods: The cross-sectional data of Chinese RA patients from 8 tertiary hospitals across four provincial capitals was used for constructing the mapping algorithms. Direct mapping using Ordinary least squares regression (OLS), the general linear regression model (GLM), MM-estimator model (MM), Tobit regression model (Tobit), Beta regression model (Beta) and the adjusted limited dependent variable mixture model (ALDVMM) and response mapping using Multivariate Ordered Probit regression model (MV-Probit) were carried out. HAQ-DI score, age, gender, BMI, DAS28-ESR and PtAAP were included as the explanatory variables. The bootstrap was used for validation of mapping algorithms. The average ranking of mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), adjusted R 2 (adjR 2) and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were used to assess the predictive ability of the mapping algorithms. Results: According to the average ranking of MAE, RMSE, adjR 2, and CCC, the mapping algorithm based on Beta performed the best. The mapping algorithm would perform better as the number of variables increasing. Conclusion: The mapping algorithms provided in this research can help researchers to obtain the health utility values more accurately. Researchers can choose the mapping algorithms under different combinations of variables based on the actual data.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation vs endoscopic sphincterotomy for retrieval of common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in retrieval of common bile duct stones (≥ 10 mm). METHODS: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, EBSCO, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched for eligible studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EPLBD with EST were identified. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers using the same criteria. Any disagreement was discussed with a third reviewer until a final consensus was reached. Pooled outcomes of complete bile duct stone clearance, stone clearance in one session, requirement for mechanical lithotripsy, and overall complication rate were determined using relative risk and 95%CI. The separate post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications were pooled and determined with the Peto odds ratio and 95%CI because of the small number of events. Heterogeneity was evaluated with the chi-squared test with P ≤ 0.1 and I(2) with a cutoff of ≥ 50%. A fixed effects model was used primarily. A random effects model was applied when significant heterogeneity was detected. Sensitivity analysis was applied to explore the potential bias. RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials with 621 participants were included. EPLBD compared with EST had similar outcomes with regard to complete stone removal rate (93.7% vs 92.5%, P = 0.54) and complete duct clearance in one session (82.2% vs 77.7%, P = 0.17). Mechanical lithotripsy was performed less in EPLBD in the retrieval of whole stones (15.5% vs 25.2%, P = 0.003), as well as in the stratified subgroup of stones larger than 15 mm (24.2% vs 40%, P = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of overall adverse events (7.9% vs 10.7%, P = 0.25), post-ERCP pancreatitis (4.0% vs 5.0%, P = 0.54), hemorrhage (1.7% vs 2.8%, P = 0.32), perforation (0.3% vs 0.9%, P = 0.35) or acute cholangitis (1.3% vs 1.3%, P = 0.92). CONCLUSION: EPLBD could be advocated as an alternative to EST in the retrieval of large common bile duct stones.