ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Respiratory diseases present a challenge for the healthcare system due to their prevalence and clinical impact. The aim of this study was to explore the current situation of hospital pharmacy in the field of respiratory diseases. METHOD: Observational, cross-sectional study, with a national scope, divided into 2 parts. In an initial phase, the activity and level of pharmaceutical care in respiratory diseases was evaluated through an online questionnaire using REDCap. The survey was addressed to department chiefs and consisted of 17 items, divided into 2 modules: general data and general activity. The second phase was open to hospital pharmacists, with the aim of exploring their opinion on care, training, and improvement needs. The number of items in this phase was 19, divided into 5 modules: general data, pharmaceutical care, competencies, training, and degree of satisfaction. RESULTS: In the first phase, 23 hospitals were included. Most of them (n=20) had a pharmacist in charge of respiratory diseases. However, a large proportion of them dedicated less than 40% of their working day to this activity. The pharmacist's activity occurred at the level of external patients (n=21), hospitalised patients (n=16), and secondarily in management (n=8). Integration is greater in pathologies such as asthma, IPF, pulmonary hypertension, and bronchiectasis. Participation in committees was present in 15 hospitals, with variability in pathologies and degree of involvement. In the second phase, 164 pharmacists participated, who considered pharmaceutical care in cystic fibrosis, asthma, and lung transplant as a priority. 51% considered integration to be adequate and 91% considered it necessary to implement prioritisation criteria. Professional competencies ranged from 6.5 to 6.9 out of 10 points. Only 45% of participants had received specific training in the last 4 years, indicating greater priority for asthma, pulmonary hypertension, and IPF. CONCLUSIONS: Most centers have pharmacists specialised in respiratory diseases. However, there is room for improvement in terms of subspecialisation, participation in multidisciplinary committees, implementation of prioritisation criteria, diversification in pathologies treated, as well as greater specific training in this area.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Respiratory diseases present a challenge for the healthcare system due to their prevalence and clinical impact. The aim of this study was to explore the current situation of hospital pharmacy in the field of respiratory diseases. METHOD: Observational, cross-sectional study, with a national scope, divided into 2 parts. In an initial phase, the activity and level of pharmaceutical care in respiratory diseases was evaluated through an online questionnaire using REDCap. The survey was addressed to department chiefs and consisted of 17 items, divided into 2 modules: general data and general activity. The second phase was open to hospital pharmacists, with the aim of exploring their opinion on care, training, and improvement needs. The number of items in this phase was 19, divided into 5 modules: general data, pharmaceutical care, competencies, training and degree of satisfaction. RESULTS: In the first phase, 23 hospitals were included. Most of them (n=20) had a pharmacist in charge of respiratory diseases. However, a large proportion of them dedicated less than 40% of their working day to this activity. The pharmacist's activity occurred at the level of external patients (n=20), hospitalized patients (n=16), and secondarily in management (n=8). Integration is greater in pathologies such as asthma, IPF, pulmonary hypertension, and bronchiectasis. Participation in committees was present in 15 hospitals, with variability in pathologies and degree of involvement. In the second phase, 164 pharmacists participated, who considered pharmaceutical care in cystic fibrosis, asthma and lung transplant as a priority. Fifty-one percent considered integration to be adequate and 91% considered it necessary to implement prioritization criteria. Professional competencies ranged from 6.5-6.9 out of 10 points. Only 45% of participants had received specific training in the last four years, indicating greater priority for asthma, pulmonary hypertension and IPF. CONCLUSIONS: Most centers have pharmacists specialized in respiratory diseases. However, there is room for improvement in terms of sub specialization, participation in multidisciplinary committees, implementation of prioritization criteria, diversification in pathologies treated, as well as greater specific training in this area.
ABSTRACT
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to gain insight into the characteristics and clinical impact of electronic monitoring devices of inhalers (EMDs) and their clinical interventions in adult patients with asthma or COPD. The search included PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus and Embase databases, as well as official EMDs websites. We found eight observational studies and ten clinical trials, assessing a wide range of clinical outcomes. Results from the meta-analysis on adherence to inhalers in a period over three months were favourable in the EMD group (fixed effects model: SMD: 0.36 [0.25-0.48]; random effects model SMD: 0.41 [0.22-0.60]). An exploratory meta-analysis found an improvement in ACT score (fixed effect model SMD: 0.25 [0.11-0.39]; random effects model: SMD: 0.47 [-0.14-1.08]). Other clinical outcomes showed mixed results in the descriptive analyses. The findings of this review highlight the benefits of EMDs in the optimization of adherence to inhaled therapy as well as the potential interest in other clinical outcomes.
