Nurse prescribing and dispensing in South Africa: Gaps in the current legislative framework.

Background: Nurse prescribing and dispensing are central to ensuring universal health access in South Africa. Objective: To describe the historical development of the legal enablements of nurse prescribing and dispensing in South Africa and highlight gaps in the current legislative framework. Method: This is a discussion article. Results: We emphasise significant deficiencies in the current legislative landscape that pose challenges to these vital nursing practices and call for urgent revisions of the legislative framework, particularly the revision of Section 56 of the Nursing Act (33 of 2005) and its related regulations, to formalise authorisation of specialist nurse prescribers in public and private practice. This will also entail an application to the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAPHRA) for the scheduling of substances by authorised nurse prescribers in the defined professional nurse and specialist nurse categories by the Minister of Health. Conclusion: There is a necessity for prompt legislative revisions to address identified deficiencies. Contribution: The contribution of this article lies in its advocacy for changes to the regulatory framework to further enable nurses to deliver safe and comprehensive health care.

Violence and Suicidal/Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Among Adolescents Undergoing Residential Treatment: An Examination of the Predictive Validity of the SAVRY, START:AV, and VRS-YV.

Using a retrospective study design, predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth, Short-Term Assessment of Risk and Treatability: Adolescent Version (START: AV), and the Violence Risk Scale-Youth Version (VRS-YV) was examined among 87 adolescents referred to a residential treatment program. With few exceptions, moderate to high accuracy was achieved for the three measures in predicting violence and suicidal/nonsuicidal self-injury occurring during the adolescents' time in treatment. Accuracy of the measures peaked within 90 days for violence and gradually increased over the 180-day follow-up for suicidal/nonsuicidal self-injury. Dynamic factors were more predictive of repeated events involving violence relative to static/historical factors, whereas only factors from the START: AV were predictive of repeated events involving suicidal/nonsuicidal self-injury. These results emphasize the need for further examining the risk of adverse outcomes beyond violence among adolescents.

Barriers and facilitators to medicine collection through the CCMDD programme at a Durban Hospital.

Background: South Africa has rekindled health reform efforts through the implementation of the Centralised Chronic Medicine Dispensing and Distribution (CCMDD) programme, as a precursor towards achieving envisioned National Health Insurance (NHI). The CCMDD programme enables stable patients to collect chronic medicines dispensed centrally from designated pick-up-points (PuPs). Barriers and facilitators of chronic medicine collection exist at different levels. Aim: To identify barriers and facilitators associated with patients' characteristics and noncollection of CCMDD patient medicine parcels (PMPs). Setting: The study was conducted at a regional public sector hospital which provides support for 19 primary facilities. Methods: An observational cross-sectional comparative study was conducted. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in collection status in terms of most of the variables compared. Patients who had been on treatment longer or who were receiving multiple items were more likely to collect medication, as were patients with arthritis, HIV and AIDS, but the association was no longer significant after adjusting for other confounders. Patients using internal PuPs were significantly more likely to collect their PMPs than patients using external PuPs, and this may have implications for achieving CCMDD objectives. Conclusion: This study has revealed that recently diagnosed patients are enrolled onto the CCMDD programme whilst the chronic condition stability is not yet attained. Patients were also enrolled onto the programme at the referral facility instead of being down-referred. Contribution: This study makes a case for evaluation research to further assess the CCMDD programme implementation, in order to improve uptake and cost-effectiveness.

COVID-19: Guidelines for pharmacists in South Africa.

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, and its declaration as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), the reliance on pharmacists as one of the first points of contact within the healthcare system has been highlighted. This evidence-based review is aimed at providing guidance for pharmacists in community, hospital and other settings in South Africa, on the management of patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, or COVID-19. The situation is rapidly evolving, and new evidence continues to emerge on a daily basis. This guidance document takes into account and includes newly available evidence and recommendations, particularly around the following aspects relating to COVID-19: EpidemiologyThe virus, its modes of transmission and incubation periodSymptom identification, including the differentiation between influenza, allergic rhinitis, sinusitis and COVID-19Social media myths and misinformationTreatment guidelines and medicines that may need to be kept in stockTreatment and prevention options, including an update on vaccine developmentThe case for and against the use of NSAIDs, ACE-inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with COVID-19Interventions and patient counselling by the pharmacist. It is critical, though, that pharmacists access the most recent and authoritative information to guide their practice. Key websites that can be relied upon are: World Health Organization (WHO): https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD): https://www.nicd.ac.za/diseases-a-z-index/covid-19/National Department of Health (NDoH): http://www.health.gov.za/index.php/outbreaks/145-corona-virus-outbreak/465-corona-virus-outbreak; https://sacoronavirus.co.za/.

COVID-19: Guidelines for pharmacists in South Africa

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, and its declaration as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), the reliance on pharmacists as one of the first points of contact within the healthcare system has been highlighted. This evidence-based review is aimed at providing guidance for pharmacists in community, hospital and other settings in South Africa, on the management of patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus disease 2019, or COVID-19. The situation is rapidly evolving, and new evidence continues to emerge on a daily basis. This guidance document takes into account and includes newly available evidence and recommendations, particularly around the following aspects relating to COVID-19: • Epidemiology • The virus, its modes of transmission and incubation period • Symptom identification, including the differentiation between influenza, allergic rhinitis, sinusitis and COVID-19 • Social media myths and misinformation • Treatment guidelines and medicines that may need to be kept in stock • Treatment and prevention options, including an update on vaccine development • The case for and against the use of NSAIDs, ACE-inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with COVID-19 • Interventions and patient counselling by the pharmacist. It is critical, though, that pharmacists access the most recent and authoritative information to guide their practice. Key websites that can be relied upon are: • World Health Organization (WHO): https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novelcoronavirus-2019 • National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD): https://www.nicd.ac.za/diseasesa-z-index/covid-19/ • National Department of Health (NDoH): http://www.health.gov.za/index.php/ outbreaks/145-corona-virus-outbreak/465-corona-virus-outbreak; https://sacoronavirus. co.za/

Pharmacological interventions for chronic pain in children: an overview of systematic reviews.

We know little about the safety or efficacy of pharmacological medicines for children and adolescents with chronic pain, despite their common use. Our aim was to conduct an overview review of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions that purport to reduce pain in children with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) or chronic cancer-related pain (CCRP). We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, EMBASE, and DARE for systematic reviews from inception to March 2018. We conducted reference and citation searches of included reviews. We included children (0-18 years of age) with CNCP or CCRP. We extracted the review characteristics and primary outcomes of ≥30% participant-reported pain relief and patient global impression of change. We sifted 704 abstracts and included 23 systematic reviews investigating children with CNCP or CCRP. Seven of those 23 reviews included 6 trials that involved children with CNCP. There were no randomised controlled trials in reviews relating to reducing pain in CCRP. We were unable to combine data in a meta-analysis. Overall, the quality of evidence was very low, and we have very little confidence in the effect estimates. The state of evidence of randomized controlled trials in this field is poor; we have no evidence from randomised controlled trials for pharmacological interventions in children with cancer-related pain, yet cannot deny individual children access to potential pain relief. Prospero ID: CRD42018086900.

An evaluation of the predictive validity of the SAVRY and YLS/CMI in justice-involved youth with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

Despite the high prevalence of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) in youth criminal justice settings, there is currently no research supporting the use of violence risk assessment tools in this population. This study examined the predictive validity of the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) in justice-involved youth with FASD. Participants were 100 justice-involved youth (ages 12-23; 81% male), including 50 diagnosed with FASD and 50 without FASD or prenatal alcohol exposure. The SAVRY and YLS/CMI were prospectively coded based on interview and file review, with recidivism (both any and violent specifically) coded 1-year post-baseline assessment. Results provide preliminary support for the validity of the SAVRY and YLS/CMI in predicting recidivism in justice-involved youth with FASD. Higher ratings across SAVRY and YLS/CMI domains were found in youth with FASD, underscoring a critical need for assessments and interventions to buffer recidivism risk and address clinical needs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

A cross-validation of the Violence Risk Appraisal Guide-Revised (VRAG-R) within a correctional sample.

The Violence Risk Appraisal Guide-Revised (VRAG-R) was developed to replace the original VRAG based on an updated and larger sample with an extended follow-up period. Using a sample of 120 adult male correctional offenders, the current study examined the interrater reliability and predictive and comparative validity of the VRAG-R to the VRAG, the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, the Statistical Information on Recidivism-Revised, and the Two-Tiered Violence Risk Estimate over a follow-up period of up to 22 years postrelease. The VRAG-R achieved moderate levels of predictive validity for both general and violent recidivism that was sustained over time as evidenced by time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Further, moderate predictive validity was evident when the Antisociality item was both removed and then subsequently replaced with a substitute measure of antisociality. Results of the individual item analyses for the VRAG and VRAG-R revealed that only a small number of items are significant predictors of violent recidivism. The results of this study have implications for the application of the VRAG-R to the assessment of violent recidivism among correctional offenders. (PsycINFO Database Record

Opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as importantWe designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol as priority areas) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in children and adolescents in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications: nociceptive, neuropathic, idiopathic, visceral, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and other unknown reasons.Opioids are used worldwide for the treatment of pain. They bind to opioid receptors in the central nervous system (mu, kappa, delta, and sigma) and can be agonists, antagonists, mixed agonist-antagonists, or partial agonists. Opioids are generally available in healthcare settings across most high-income countries, but access may be restricted in low- and middle-income countries. For example, opioids currently available in the UK include: buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, and tramadol. Opioids are used in varying doses (generally based on body weight for paediatric patients) by means of parenteral, transmucosal, transdermal, or oral administration (immediate release or modified release). To achieve adequate pain relief in children using opioids, with an acceptable grade of adverse effects, the recommended method is a lower dose gradually titrated to effect in the child. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of opioids used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing opioids with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat, using standard methods. We assessed GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and planned to create a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. We rated the quality of the evidence as very low. We downgraded the quality of evidence by three levels due to the lack of data reported for any outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. We are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some opioids, such as morphine and codeine, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.This means that no conclusions could be made about efficacy or harm in the use of opioids to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

Opioids for cancer-related pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. Views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important. In the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, and it was assumed that children quickly forgot about painful experiences.We designed a suite of seven reviews in chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) to review the evidence for children's pain using pharmacological interventions.As one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity for children and adolescents in the world today, childhood cancer (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Cancer pain in infants, children, and adolescents is primarily nociceptive pain with negative long term effects. Cancer-related pain is generally caused directly by the tumour itself such as compressing on the nerve or inflammation of the organs. Cancer-related pain generally occurs as a result of perioperative procedures, nerve damage caused by radiation or chemotherapy treatments, or mucositis. However, this review focused on pain caused directly by the tumour itself such as nerve infiltration, external nerve compression, and other inflammatory events.Opioids are used worldwide for the treatment of pain. Currently available opioids include: buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, and tramadol. Opioids are generally available in healthcare settings across most developed countries but access may be restricted in developing countries. To achieve adequate pain relief in children using opioids, with an acceptable grade of adverse effects, the recommended method is to start with a low dose gradually titrated to effect or unacceptable adverse effect in the child. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy, and adverse events, of opioids used to treat cancer-related pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid and Embase via Ovid from inception to 22 February 2017. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with or without blinding, of any dose, and any route, treating cancer-related pain in children and adolescents, comparing opioids with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and planned to create a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: No studies were identified that were eligible for inclusion in this review (very low quality evidence). Several studies tested opioids on adults with cancer-related pain, but none in participants aged from birth to 17 years.We rated the quality of evidence as very low, downgraded due to a lack of available data; no analyses could be undertaken. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No conclusions can be drawn about efficacy or harm in the use of opioids to treat cancer-related pain in children and adolescents. As a result, there is no RCT evidence to support or refute the use of opioids to treat cancer-related pain in children and adolescents.

Are adolescent risk assessment tools sensitive to change? A framework and examination of the SAVRY and the YLS/CMI.

Although many adolescent risk assessment tools include an emphasis on dynamic factors, little research has examined the extent to which these tools are capable of measuring change. In this article, we outline a framework to evaluate a tool's capacity to measure change. This framework includes the following: (a) measurement error and reliable change, and (b) sensitivity (i.e., internal, external, and relative sensitivity). We then used this framework to evaluate the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI). Research assistants conducted 509 risk assessments with 146 adolescents on probation (101 male, 45 female), who were assessed every 3 months over a 1-year period. Internal sensitivity (i.e., change over time) was partially supported in that a modest proportion of youth showed reliable changes over the 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. External sensitivity (i.e., the association between change scores and reoffending) was also partially supported. In particular, 22% of the associations between change scores and any and violent reoffending were significant at a 6-month follow-up. However, only 1 change score (i.e., peer associations) remained significant after the Bonferroni correction was applied. Finally, relative sensitivity was not supported, as the SAVRY and YLS/CMI was not more dynamic than the Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV). Specifically, the 1-year rank-order stability coefficients for the SAVRY, YLS/CMI, and PCL:YV Total Scores were .78, .75, and .76, respectively. Although the SAVRY and YLS/CMI hold promise, further efforts may help to enhance sensitivity to short-term changes in risk. (PsycINFO Database Record

Drug interactions between hormonal contraceptives and antiretrovirals.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize published evidence on drug interactions between hormonal contraceptives and antiretrovirals. DESIGN: Systematic review of the published literature. METHODS: We searched PubMed, POPLINE, and EMBASE for peer-reviewed publications of studies (in any language) from inception to 21 September 2015. We included studies of women using hormonal contraceptives and antiretrovirals concurrently. Outcomes of interest were effectiveness of either therapy, toxicity, or pharmacokinetics. We used standard abstraction forms to summarize and assess strengths and weaknesses. RESULTS: Fifty reports from 46 studies were included. Most antiretrovirals whether used for therapy or prevention, have limited interactions with hormonal contraceptive methods, with the exception of efavirenz. Although depot medroxyprogesterone acetate is not affected, limited data on implants and combined oral contraceptive pills suggest that efavirenz-containing combination antiretroviral therapy may compromise contraceptive effectiveness of these methods. However, implants remain very effective despite such drug interactions. Antiretroviral plasma concentrations and effectiveness are generally not affected by hormonal contraceptives. CONCLUSION: Women taking antiretrovirals, for treatment or prevention, should not be denied access to the full range of hormonal contraceptive options, but should be counseled on the expected rates of unplanned pregnancy associated with all contraceptive methods, in order to make their own informed choices.

Changes in J-SOAP-II and SAVRY Scores Over the Course of Residential, Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for Adolescent Sexual Offending.

Although the Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol-II (J-SOAP-II) and the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) include an emphasis on dynamic, or modifiable factors, there has been little research on dynamic changes on these tools. To help address this gap, we compared admission and discharge scores of 163 adolescents who attended a residential, cognitive-behavioral treatment program for sexual offending. Based on reliable change indices, one half of youth showed a reliable decrease on the J-SOAP-II Dynamic Risk Total Score and one third of youth showed a reliable decrease on the SAVRY Dynamic Risk Total Score. Contrary to expectations, decreases in risk factors and increases in protective factors did not predict reduced sexual, violent nonsexual, or any reoffending. In addition, no associations were found between scores on the Psychopathy Checklist:Youth Version and levels of change. Overall, the J-SOAP-II and the SAVRY hold promise in measuring change, but further research is needed.

Does reassessment of risk improve predictions? A framework and examination of the SAVRY and YLS/CMI.

Although experts recommend regularly reassessing adolescents' risk for violence, it is unclear whether reassessment improves predictions. Thus, in this prospective study, the authors tested 3 hypotheses as to why reassessment might improve predictions, namely the shelf-life, dynamic change, and familiarity hypotheses. Research assistants (RAs) rated youth on the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY) and the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI) every 3 months over a 1-year period, conducting 624 risk assessments with 156 youth on probation. The authors then examined charges for violence and any offense over a 2-year follow-up period, and youths' self-reports of reoffending. Contrary to the shelf-life hypothesis, predictions did not decline or expire over time. Instead, time-dependent area under the curve scores remained consistent across the follow-up period. Contrary to the dynamic change hypothesis, changes in youth's risk total scores, compared to what is average for that youth, did not predict changes in reoffending. Finally, contrary to the familiarity hypothesis, reassessments were no more predictive than initial assessments, despite RAs' increased familiarity with youth. Before drawing conclusions, researchers should evaluate the extent to which youth receiving the usual probation services show meaningful short-term changes in risk and, if so, whether risk assessment tools are sensitive to these changes. (PsycINFO Database Record

Incremental and Predictive Validity of the Antisocial Process Screening Device in a Community Sample of Male and Female Ethnic Minority and Caucasian Youth.

The Antisocial Process Screening Device (APSD) is a well-supported tool for assessing psychopathic features in youth. However, most research with the APSD has been derived from clinical and forensic samples comprised mainly of male Caucasian and African American adolescents. In this prospective study, the incremental and predictive validity of the self-report APSD for violent and non-violent offending was examined in an ethnically diverse community sample of male and female youth (N = 335) aged 12 to 14. High-school students from a moderate sized city in Western Canada completed the self-report APSD and then completed the Self-Report of Offending 6 months later. Receiver Operating Characteristics analysis indicated that APSD total and subscale scores were predictive of violent and non-violent offending at 6-month follow-up with moderate to large effect sizes. In addition, total scores on the APSD added incremental predictive utility above and beyond traditional criminogenic predictors of youth offending (i.e., prior offending, delinquent peer affiliation, poor school achievement, substance use, low parental monitoring). Although sex differences emerged in the predictive utility of the Impulsivity subscale of the APSD vis-à-vis violent offending, sex did not moderate the relationship between APSD total, Narcissism, or Callous/Unemotional scores and offending. In addition, the predictive utility of the APSD did not vary as a function of the youth's ethnic background. These findings suggest that: (1) the self-report APSD may have utility for risk or threat assessment with normative school populations, (2) APSD findings from higher risk samples generalize to a lower risk sample of high-school youth, and (3) predictive utility of APSD total scores do not differ across male and female Caucasian and ethnic minority youth.