Drug samples in family medicine teaching units: a cross-sectional descriptive study: Part 1: drug sample management policies and the relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and residents in Quebec.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the existence and the level of health care professional (HCP) knowledge of local policies regarding drug sample use and the relationship between residents and the pharmaceutical industry in academic primary health care settings. DESIGN: Descriptive cross-sectional survey. Health care providers were invited to complete a self-administered questionnaire on drug sample use between February and December 2013. Managers of drug samples were also asked to complete a specific questionnaire on drug sample management and policies and an inventory log sheet. Data about the existence of written policies were validated with health and social services centre (HSCC) directors or pharmacy departments and family medicine teaching unit (FMTU) directors between February and June 2014. SETTING: All 42 FMTUs in Quebec. PARTICIPANTS: All HCPs in the FMTUs authorized to hand out drug samples (practising physicians, residents, pharmacists, and nurses). Dispensers were defined as those who reported using drug samples. Managers were defined as HCPs or staff members who managed drug samples. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Existence of written policies on drug sample use in HSCCs and FMTUs; whether FMTUs applied the HSCC policies if they existed; whether dispensers were aware of the existence of the policies; and whether policies on the relationships between residents and pharmaceutical companies existed. RESULTS: Among the 42 FMTUs, 33 (79%) kept drug samples. Of these, 30% (10 of 33) did not have policies about drug samples in the FMTU or in the HSCC. A total of 67% (579 of 859) of HCPs from these FMTUs reported using drug samples. Most dispensers did not know if a policy existed in their FMTU (n = 297; 51%) or their HSCC (n = 420; 73%). Eleven (26%) of the 42 FMTU directors reported having a policy regarding relationships between residents and the pharmaceutical industry. Most drug sample dispensers were not aware whether such a policy existed (n = 310; 54%). CONCLUSION: Many FMTUs did not have policies regarding drug samples or relationships between residents and the pharmaceutical industry. Variation in use and management of drug samples and the lack of knowledge of HCPs about the existence of policies point to the need to implement uniform policies in all FMTUs in Quebec.

Unilateral absence of vas deferens: prevalence among 23, 013 men seeking vasectomy

ABSTRACT Purpose: To determine the prevalence of unilateral absence of vas deferens (UAVD) in men with both testes seeking vasectomy. Materials and Methods: Computerized charts of 23,013 patients encountered between January 1994 and December 2013 in one university hospital and two community clinics of Quebec City, Canada, were searched. Pre-vasectomy consultation, operative reports and semen analysis results were reviewed to identify cases of UAVD. Cases were categorized as confirmed (unilateral vasectomy and success confirmed by semen analysis) or possible congenital UAVD further sub-categorized according to whether or not a scrotal anomaly was present. Results: Among 159 men identified as potentially having UAVD, chart review revealed that 47 had only one testicle, 26 had bilateral vasa, and four were misdiagnosed (post-vasectomy semen analysis [PVSA] showing motile sperm after unilateral vasectomy) leaving 82 men deemed cases of UAVD (0.36%, 95% confidence interval 0.28% to 0.43%). These were classified as confirmed (n=48, 0.21%) and possible (n=34, 0.15%; 22 without and 12 with scrotal anomalies) congenital UAVD. The misdiagnosis ratio of UAVD was low when scrotal content was otherwise normal (1:48), but higher if anomalies were present (3:12). Conclusions: Most surgeons who perform vasectomy will encounter cases of UAVD. In most suspected cases, it is safe and effective to proceed with unilateral vasectomy under local anesthesia while stressing the need for PVSA. Further studies or scrotal exploration may be considered in patient with prior scrotal surgery.

Unilateral absence of vas deferens: prevalence among 23.013 men seeking vasectomy.

PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of unilateral absence of vas deferens (UAVD) in men with both testes seeking vasectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computerized charts of 23.013 patients encountered between January 1994 and December 2013 in one university hospital and two community clinics of Quebec City, Canada, were searched. Pre-vasectomy consultation, operative reports and semen analysis results were reviewed to identify cases of UAVD. Cases were categorized as confirmed (unilateral vasectomy and success confirmed by semen analysis) or possible congenital UAVD further sub-categorized according to whether or not a scrotal anomaly was present. RESULTS: Among 159 men identified as potentially having UAVD, chart review revealed that 47 had only one testicle, 26 had bilateral vasa, and four were misdiagnosed (post-vasectomy semen analysis [PVSA] showing motile sperm after unilateral vasectomy) leaving 82 men deemed cases of UAVD (0.36%, 95% confidence interval 0.28% to 0.43%). These were classified as confirmed (n=48, 0.21%) and possible (n=34, 0.15%; 22 without and 12 with scrotal anomalies) congenital UAVD. The misdiagnosis ratio of UAVD was low when scrotal content was otherwise normal (1:48), but higher if anomalies were present (3:12). CONCLUSIONS: Most surgeons who perform vasectomy will encounter cases of UAVD. In most suspected cases, it is safe and effective to proceed with unilateral vasectomy under local anesthesia while stressing the need for PVSA. Further studies or scrotal exploration may be considered in patient with prior scrotal surgery.