An economic evaluation of community pharmacy-dispensed naloxone in Canada.

Aims: To determine the cost-effectiveness of pharmacy-based intranasal (IN) and intramuscular (IM) naloxone distribution in Canada. Methods: We developed a state-transition model for pharmacy-based naloxone distribution, every 3 years, to illicit, prescription, opioid-agonist therapy and nonopioid use populations compared to no naloxone distribution. We used a monthly cycle length, lifetime horizon and a Canadian provincial Ministry of Health perspective. Transition probabilities, cost and utility data were retrieved from the literature. Costs (2020) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were discounted 1.5% annually. Microsimulation, 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Distribution of naloxone to all Canadians compared to no distribution prevented 151 additional overdose deaths per 10,000 persons, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $50,984 per QALY for IM naloxone and an ICER of $126,060 per QALY for IN naloxone. Distribution of any naloxone to only illicit opioid users was the most cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that survival rates for illicit opioid users were most influenced by the availability of either emergency medical services or naloxone. Conclusion: Distribution of IM and IN naloxone to all Canadians every 3 years is likely cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $140,000 Canadian dollars/QALY (~3 × gross domestic product from the World Health Organization). Distribution to people who use illicit opioids was most cost-effective and prevented the most deaths. This is important, as more overdose deaths could be prevented through nationwide public funding of IN naloxone kits through pharmacies, since individuals report a preference for IN naloxone and these formulations are easier to use, save lives and are cost-effective. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2024;157:xx-xx.

Pharmacist Disciplinary Action: What Do Pharmacists Get in Trouble for?

Objective: This study aims to determine the reasons for disciplinary action and resultant consequences for Canadian pharmacists and any associations with demographic factors. Methods: Regulatory body disciplinary action cases from 10 Canadian provinces were coded. Demographic information was coded. Results: There were 665 pharmacist cases from nine provinces between January 2010 and December 2020. The rate of disciplinary action was low (1.37 cases/1,000 practitioners/year). Professional misconduct was the most common category of violation. Male pharmacists were overrepresented in disciplinary action cases. Most cases involved community pharmacists. Conclusion: This study is the first, to our knowledge, in Canada to analyze the demographic factors of pharmacists subjected to disciplinary action. It updates a previous review of pharmacist disciplinary action (Foong et al. 2018).

Dentist Disciplinary Action: What Do Dentists Get in Trouble for?

Objective: This study aims to determine the reasons for disciplinary action, the consequences and any associations with demographic factors for Canadian dentists. Methods: Publicly available regulatory body disciplinary action cases from 10 Canadian provinces were coded. Demographic factors were also coded. Results: There were 344 dentist cases from five provinces between January 2010 and December 2020. The rate of disciplinary action was low (1.38 cases/1,000 practitioners/year). Clinical incompetence was the most common category of disciplinary action, followed by professional misconduct and dishonest business practices. Male dentists were overrepresented in the disciplinary action cases compared to the rest of the workforce. Conclusion: This study is the first, to our knowledge, to describe the outcomes of regulatory body disciplinary action for Canadian dentists.

Reasons for Low Regulatory Body Discipline Rates for Canadian Hospital Pharmacists.

Background: Past research on disciplinary action by pharmacist regulatory bodies has shown that most cases concern community pharmacists, with few occurring in a hospital setting. Objective: To investigate how discipline-related issues involving pharmacists are dealt with by hospital pharmacy departments in Canada. Methods: Hospital pharmacy directors and managers from small, medium, and large hospitals across Canada were invited to participate in semi-structured telephone interviews. The interview questions focused on the discipline process in participants' organizations, the situations when reporting to the regulatory body is deemed to be warranted, possible penalties, and recommendations for improving the regulatory body or organizational discipline process. Results: Ten participants, from British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador, agreed to be interviewed. Five key themes emerged as contributing to lower rates of hospital pharmacist discipline cases being escalated to the regulatory college level: robust organizational discipline processes independent from the regulatory college, a practice environment promoting competence, union representation, preference for a remedial approach to discipline, and lack of clarity about when to report to the regulatory authority. Conclusions: This study identified a number of reasons why discipline of hospital pharmacists by a regulatory body may be less prevalent than discipline relating to community pharmacists. The main reasons may be lack of clarity about when to report a case to the regulator and a lack of transparency, given that many cases are handled internally within hospitals. Environmental supports for competence and employee protections (e.g., through a union) may also reduce discipline cases.

Contexte: Des recherches antérieures sur les mesures disciplinaires prises par les organismes de réglementation des pharmaciens ont montré que la plupart des cas concernaient des pharmaciens communautaires, et que peu se produisaient en milieu hospitalier. Objectif: Examiner comment les questions disciplinaires impliquant des pharmaciens sont traitées par les départements de pharmacie hospitalière au Canada. Méthodes: Les directeurs et gestionnaires de pharmacies de petits, moyens et grands hôpitaux au Canada ont été invités à participer à des entrevues téléphoniques semi-structurées. Les questions portaient sur le processus disciplinaire en place dans les organismes des participants; les situations où le signalement à l'organisme de réglementation était jugé justifié; les sanctions possibles; et les recommandations pour améliorer le processus disciplinaire de l'organisme de réglementation ou de l'organisme. Résultats: Dix participants de la Colombie-Britannique, de la Saskatchewan, de l'Ontario, du Nouveau-Brunswick, de l'Île-du-Prince-Édouard et de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador ont accepté d'être interrogés. Cinq thèmes clés ont été identifiés comme contribuant au taux plus faible de cas de discipline des pharmaciens hospitaliers remontés au niveau de l'organisme de réglementation: des processus disciplinaires organisationnels solides indépendants de l'organisme de réglementation; un environnement de pratique favorisant la compétence; la représentation syndicale; la préférence pour une approche corrective de la discipline; et le manque de clarté quant au moment où il faut signaler à l'autorité de réglementation. Conclusions: Cette étude a identifié un certain nombre de raisons pour lesquelles les mesures disciplinaires relatives des pharmaciens hospitaliers par un organisme de réglementation peuvent être moins répandues que celles liées aux pharmaciens communautaires. Les principales raisons pourraient être le manque de clarté quant au moment de signaler un cas à l'autorité réglementaire et un manque de transparence, étant donné que de nombreux cas sont traités en interne dans les hôpitaux. Les soutiens environnementaux pour la compétence et la protection des employés (par exemple, par l'entremise d'un syndicat) peuvent également réduire les cas de discipline.

Evaluation of an Intergenerational and Technological Intervention for Loneliness: Protocol for a Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Social integration and mental health are vital aspects of healthy aging. However, close to half of Canadians older than 80 years report feeling socially isolated. Research has shown that social isolation leads to increased mortality and morbidity, and various interventions have been studied to alleviate loneliness among older adults. This proposal presents an evaluation of an intervention that provides one-on-one coaching, is intergenerational, provides both educational and socialization experiences, and increases technology literacy of older adults to overcome loneliness. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the protocol of a randomized, mixed-methods study that will take place in Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study is to evaluate if an intergenerational technology literacy program can reduce social isolation and depression in older adults via quantitative and qualitative outcome measures. METHODS: This study is a randomized, mixed-methods, feasibility trial with 2 conditions. Older adults in the intervention condition will receive 1 hour of weekly technological assistance to send an email to a family member, for 8 weeks, with the assistance of a volunteer. Participants in the control condition will not receive any intervention. The primary outcomes are loneliness, measured using the University of California, Los Angeles Loneliness Scale, and depression, measured using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale, both of which are measured weekly. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, as assessed using the Older People's Quality of Life-Brief version, and technological literacy, evaluated using the Computer Proficiency Questionnaire-12, both of which will be administered before and after the intervention. Semistructured interviews will be completed before and after the intervention to assess participants' social connectedness, familiarity with technology, and their experience with the intervention. The study will be completed in a long-term care facility in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: This study was funded in April 2019 and ethical approval was obtained in August 2019. Recruitment for the study started in November 2019. The intervention began in February 2020 but was halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The trial will be restarted when safe. As of March 2020, 8 participants were recruited. CONCLUSIONS: Information and communication technology interventions have shown varying results in reducing loneliness and improving mental health among older adults. Few studies have examined the role of one-on-one coaching for older adults in addition to technology education in such interventions. Data from this study may have the potential to provide evidence for other groups to disseminate similar interventions in their respective communities. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/23767.

Pharmacy students' perceived willingness and ability to negotiate for paid co-operative education positions.

Background: Evidence of a gender wage gap has been identified across many professions, with some evidence in pharmacy. Negotiation is one potential strategy to address this gap and it is underutilized, especially among women. No studies to date have examined pharmacy student perceptions of negotiation when applying for co-operative education positions - a potential sign of willingness to negotiate for entry-level positions upon graduation. Objectives: To examine pharmacy students' comfort with and ability to engage employers in negotiation over wage and other work-related considerations for mandatory and paid co-operative education work terms at the University of Waterloo (Waterloo, Ontario, Canada). Methods: Two focus groups, one for female and one for male students, were performed with students who had completed at least one co-operative education placement. Focus groups aimed to elucidate students perceived ability to negotiate with potential employers, to identify strategies that educators can employ to better support students through the hiring and negotiation process, and to elicit student perceptions on the gender wage gap in pharmacy. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim, and data were coded inductively by two independent reviewers, employing thematic analysis. Results: Three major and two minor themes were identified: Preservation of the relationship; Power differential and perceived ability to negotiate; Institutional support and training; Negative experience with negotiation and wage gaps; and the presence of a gendered approach to negotiation. Pharmacy students rarely engage in negotiation during co-operative hiring processes at the University of Waterloo, with some female students expressing hesitation to negotiate due to concerns about being perceived as "bossy". Students of both genders felt poorly equipped to engage in negotiation with a potential employer, and lacked confidence in initiating such a conversation. Conclusions: Students identified a number of factors which influence their ability and desire to negotiate wages during co-op placement, including the requirements and logistics of placements, the perceived power imbalance between students and potential employers, and a concern that any wage negotiation may overshadow the value placed by students on the opportunities to provide patient care. Educators can play a role in equipping students, especially female students, with tools to enter into conversations on wages with potential employers.

Remunerated patient care services and injections by pharmacists: An international update.

OBJECTIVES: Recognizing pharmacists' increasing roles as primary care providers, programs offering remuneration for patient care services and the administration of injections by pharmacists continue to be implemented. The objective of this article is to provide an update on remuneration programs available to pharmacists internationally for nondispensing services. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches for relevant articles published from January 2013 to February 2018 across PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cochrane Library, Econlit, Scopus and Web of Science. Gray literature searches, including targeted searches of websites of payers and pharmacy associations, were also performed. STUDY SELECTION: Programs were included if they were newly introduced or had changes to patient eligibility criteria and fees since previously published reviews and if they were established programs offered by third-party payers for activities separate from dispensing. DATA EXTRACTION: Descriptive information on each program was extracted, including the program's jurisdiction (country and state, provincial or regional level, as applicable), payer, service description, patient eligibility criteria and fee structure. RESULTS: Over the 5-year period studied, 95 new programs for noninjection patient care services and 37 programs for pharmacist-administered injections were introduced. Large ranges in fees offered for similar programs were observed across programs, even within the same country or region, at an average of $US 71 for an initial medication review, $19 for follow-ups to these reviews, $18 for prescription adaptations and $13 for injection administration. Apart from some smoking cessation programs in England, which offered incentive payments for successful quits, all services were remunerated on a fee-for-service basis, often in the form of a flat fee regardless of the time spent providing the service. CONCLUSION: Although funding for pharmacists' activities continues to show growth, concerns identified in previous reviews persist, including the great variability in remunerated activities, patient eligibility and fees. These issues may limit opportunities for multijurisdictional program and service outcome evaluation. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2019;152:xx-xx.

Remunerated patient care services and injections by pharmacists: An international update.

OBJECTIVES: Recognizing pharmacists' increasing roles as primary care providers, programs offering remuneration for patient care services, and the administration of injections by pharmacists continue to be implemented. The objective of this article is to provide an update on remuneration programs available to pharmacists internationally for nondispensing services. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches for relevant articles published from January 2013 to February 2018 across Pubmed (Medline), Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Cochrane Library, Econlit, Scopus, and Web of Science. Gray literature searches, including targeted searches of websites of payers and pharmacy associations, were also performed. STUDY SELECTION: Programs were included if they were newly introduced or had changes to patient eligibility criteria and fees since previously published reviews and if they were established programs offered by third-party payers for activities separate from dispensing. DATA EXTRACTION: Descriptive information on each program was extracted, including the program's jurisdiction (country and state, provincial, or regional level, as applicable), payer, service description, patient eligibility criteria, and fee structure. RESULTS: Over the 5-year period studied, 95 new programs for noninjection patient care services and 37 programs for pharmacist-administered injections were introduced. Large ranges in fees offered for similar programs were observed across programs, even within the same country or region, at an average of $US 71 for an initial medication review, $19 for follow-ups to these reviews, $18 for prescription adaptations, and $13 for injection administration. Apart from some smoking cessation programs in England, which offered incentive payments for successful quits, all services were remunerated on a fee-for-service basis, often in the form of a flat fee regardless of the time spent providing the service. CONCLUSION: Although funding for pharmacists' activities continues to show growth, concerns identified in previous reviews persist, including the great variability in remunerated activities, patient eligibility, and fees. These issues may limit opportunities for multijurisdictional program and service outcome evaluation.

Physician and Pharmacist Medication Decision-Making in the Time of Electronic Health Records: Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Primary care needs to be patient-centered, integrated, and interprofessional to help patients with complex needs manage the burden of medication-related problems. Considering the growing problem of polypharmacy, increasing attention has been paid to how and when medication-related decisions should be coordinated across multidisciplinary care teams. Improved knowledge on how integrated electronic health records (EHRs) can support interprofessional shared decision-making for medication therapy management is necessary to continue improving patient care. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to examine how physicians and pharmacists understand and communicate patient-focused medication information with each other and how this knowledge can influence the design of EHRs. METHODS: This study is part of a broader cross-Canada study between patients and health care providers around how medication-related decisions are made and communicated. We visited community pharmacies, team-based primary care clinics, and independent-practice family physician clinics throughout Ontario, Nova Scotia, Alberta, and Quebec. Research assistants conducted semistructured interviews with physicians and pharmacists. A modified version of the Multidisciplinary Framework Method was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: We collected data from 19 pharmacies and 9 medical clinics and identified 6 main themes from 34 health care professionals. First, Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making was not occurring and clinicians made decisions based on their understanding of the patient. Physicians and pharmacists reported indirect Communication, incomplete Information specifically missing insight into indication and adherence, and misaligned Processes of Care that were further compounded by EHRs that are not designed to facilitate collaboration. Scope of Practice examined professional and workplace boundaries for pharmacists and physicians that were internally and externally imposed. Physicians decided on the degree of the Physician-Pharmacist Relationship, often predicated by colocation. CONCLUSIONS: We observed limited communication and collaboration between primary care providers and pharmacists when managing medications. Pharmacists were missing key information around reason for use, and physicians required accurate information around adherence. EHRs are a potential tool to help clinicians communicate information to resolve this issue. EHRs need to be designed to facilitate interprofessional medication management so that pharmacists and physicians can move beyond task-based work toward a collaborative approach.

Demystifying serotonin syndrome (or serotonin toxicity).

OBJECTIVE: To review the symptoms of serotonin toxicity (commonly referred to as serotonin syndrome) and the causative drugs and their mechanisms of action, and to equip primary care providers with practical strategies to prevent and identify serotonin toxicity. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles on serotonin toxicity, the causes, and the differential diagnosis using search terms related to serotonin toxicity (serotonin syndrome, serotonin toxicity, serotonin overdose), causes (individual names of drug classes, individual drug names), and diagnosis (differential diagnosis, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, anticholinergic toxicity, discontinuation syndrome, malignant hyperthermia, serotonin symptoms). Experts in psychiatric medicine, psychiatric pharmacy, clinical pharmacology, and medical toxicology were consulted. Evidence is level II and III. MAIN MESSAGE: Serotonin toxicity is a drug-induced condition caused by too much serotonin in synapses in the brain. Cases requiring hospitalization are rare, and mild cases caused by serotonin-mediated side effects are unlikely to be fatal. Patients present with a combination of neuromuscular, autonomic, and mental status symptoms. Serotonin-elevating drugs include monoamine oxidase inhibitors, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and serotonin releasers. Most cases involve 2 drugs that increase serotonin in different ways; the most concerning combination is a monoamine oxidase inhibitor with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. CONCLUSION: Family physicians play a key role in identifying and preventing serotonin syndrome by teaching patients to recognize symptoms and monitoring patients throughout therapy.

Démystifier le syndrome (ou la toxicité) sérotoninergique.

OBJECTIF: Passer en revue les symptômes de la toxicité sérotoninergique (communément appelée le syndrome sérotoninergique), les médicaments causatifs et leurs mécanismes d'action, et proposer aux médecins de soins primaires des stratégies pratiques pour prévenir et dépister la toxicité sérotoninergique. QUALITÉ DES DONNÉES: Une recherche documentaire a été effectuée dans PubMed et Google Scholar pour trouver des articles pertinents sur la toxicité sérotoninergique, ses causes et les diagnostics différentiels, à l'aide d'expressions de recherche liées à la toxicité sérotoninergique (serotonin syndrome, serotonin toxicity, serotonin overdose), à ses causes (noms individuels de classes de médicaments, noms individuels de médicaments), et à son diagnostic (differential diagnosis, neuroleptic malignant syndrome, anticholinergic toxicity, discontinuation syndrome, malignant hyperthermia, serotonin symptoms). Des experts en médecine psychiatrique, en pharmacie psychiatrique, en pharmacologie clinique et en toxicologie médicale ont été consultés. Les données probantes sont de niveaux II et III. MESSAGE PRINCIPAL: La toxicité sérotoninergique est un problème induit par des médicaments, qui est causé par la présence de trop de sérotonine dans les synapses du cerveau. Les cas qui exigent une hospitalisation sont rares, et il est peu probable que les cas bénins dus aux effets secondaires médiés par la sérotonine soient fatals. Les patients présentent une combinaison de symptômes neuromusculaires, du système nerveux autonome et de l'état mental. Parmi les médicaments qui augmentent la sérotonine se trouvent les inhibiteurs de la monoamine oxydase, les inhibiteurs de la recapture de la sérotonine et les libérateurs de sérotonine. Dans la plupart des cas, 2 médicaments qui augmentent la sérotonine de façons différentes sont en cause; la combinaison la plus inquiétante est un inhibiteur de la monoamine oxydase avec un inhibiteur sélectif de la recapture de la sérotonine ou un inhibiteur de la recapture de la sérotonine-noradrénaline. CONCLUSION: Les médecins de famille jouent un rôle important dans la détection et la prévention du syndrome sérotoninergique en enseignant aux patients à reconnaître les symptômes et en surveillant les patients durant toute leur thérapie.