Multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions in secondary care settings between countries of various income levels: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical pharmacy services often involve multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions. However, current pharmacy practice models vary across different countries. Despite the documented benefits of clinical pharmacy services, the characteristics of pharmacist-led interventions in different countries have not yet been adequately explored and described. Therefore, this protocol outlines the methodology for a proposed scoping review aiming to investigate various types of multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions and the outcomes used to evaluate their effectiveness within secondary care settings. Additionally, the scoping review will map the current evidence surrounding the characteristics of interventions and outcomes reported across various countries of socioeconomic status. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The scoping review will be conducted according to the JBI Methodology for Scoping Reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. We will systematically search the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHost), Embase (embase.com), Scopus (scopus.com), Cochrane Library (cochranelibrary.com) and APA PsycInfo (Ovid). Additionally, the reference lists of identified reviews and included full texts will be searched for relevant papers. Grey literature sources, such as International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) website, will be searched. We will include primary studies published in the English language from January 2013 to December 2023, involving secondary care multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions. Two independent reviewers will screen studies against eligibility criteria and use a piloted data extraction form to extract relevant information. We will extract relevant data, complete a tabular summary from each included publication and analyse it. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as we will be using data from publicly available literature sources. Findings will be disseminated in publications and presentations with relevant stakeholders. We aim to map available evidence across the breadth of studies that have reported multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions and their outcomes.

Quality of medicines in Sri Lanka: a retrospective review of safety alerts.

BACKGROUND: Many medicine quality problems are detected after they arrive at health facilities. Thus, critically defective medicines that may pose health risks to patients need to be withheld or recalled. AIMS: To investigate the withheld and recalled medicines in relation to the types of defects, their total numbers, therapeutic categories, pharmaceutical dosage forms, and country of manufacturer during the study period. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on withheld and recalled medicines published on the publicly available National Medicines Regulatory Authority (NMRA) official website in Sri Lanka between June 2018 and August 2021. Details on substandard medicines (SM) were extracted and documented. Each record of SM was individually reviewed to determine the type of defect, subsequent action taken by NMRA, therapeutic category, pharmaceutical dosage form, and country of manufacturer. RESULTS: A total of 163 defects were identified in 143 defective medicines, among which the most common types of defects were contamination (n = 59, 36.2%), stability defects (n = 41, 25.2%), packaging and labelling defects (n = 27, 16.6%) and active pharmaceutical ingredient defects (n = 26, 15.9%). Out of 143 total defective medicines identified, anti-infectives accounted for 41.9%, while parenteral preparations (44.0%) were found to be frequently defective. Nearly 70% of the recalled and withheld medicines were of Indian origin, and some manufacturers were identified to be repeatedly involved. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that contamination was the most frequent cause of defective medicines, while parenteral preparations and anti-infectives were the most susceptible pharmaceutical dosage form and therapeutic category found to be substandard, respectively. In addition, the findings show that some manufacturers were accountable for repetitive withholdings and recalls, which reflects the ignorance of quality control measures and weak regulatory inspections as a violation of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP).