Statin Effects on Exacerbation Rates, Mortality, and Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Review of Prospective Studies.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a debilitating, irreversible disease with currently available therapies targeting symptom control and exacerbation reduction. A need for alternative disease-modifying therapies remains, specifically those that may have antiinflammatory and immunomodulatory properties that impact the pathophysiologic components of COPD. Statin drugs, the current gold standard for the treatment of dyslipidemia and prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), contain properties that affect the inflammatory disease processes seen in COPD. Several retrospective studies have demonstrated that statins may have a benefit in the reduction of morbidity and mortality in patients with COPD. This has led to prospective trials evaluating the impact of statins on various COPD-related outcomes. This article reviews the current body of prospective evidence for use of statins in patients with COPD. A search of the PubMed/Medline database of English-language articles was conducted from 1964 through November 2015; references of relevant articles were also reviewed for qualifying studies. Prospective studies of all types relating to statin use in patients with COPD were included if they had COPD- or respiratory-related outcomes; ultimately, eight studies were identified for this review. Statin effects on exacerbation rates, mortality, and inflammatory markers in patients with COPD are discussed. Strong prospective evidence does not currently exist to suggest that statins provide a clinical benefit in patients with COPD who do not have other CVD risk factors. Benefits from statins that have been illustrated are likely explained by their impact on underlying CVD risk factors rather than the COPD disease process. An opportunity exists for unanswered questions to be addressed in future studies.

An elective course on current concepts in adult ambulatory care.

OBJECTIVE: To design and evaluate a doctor of pharmacy course exploring disease states commonly encountered in ambulatory care, while applying literature to clinical practice and promoting a continual learning mindset. DESIGN: This elective incorporated a learner-centered teaching approach. Each week, 2 groups of students were assigned a clinical trial to present to their peers. The focus was on clinical application and impact, rather than literature evaluation. A social networking group on Facebook was used to expose students to pharmacy information outside the classroom. ASSESSMENT: Student grades were determined by multiple activities: presentations, participation and moderation of the Facebook group, class participation, quiz scores, and quiz question development. Course evaluations served as a qualitative assessment of student learning and perceptions, quizzes were the most objective assessment of student learning, and presentation evaluations were the most directed assessment of course goals. CONCLUSION: This elective was an innovative approach to teaching ambulatory care that effectively filled a curricular void. Successful attainment of the primary course goals and objectives was demonstrated through course evaluations, surveys, and quiz and presentation scores.

Survey of pharmacist-managed primary care clinics using healthcare failure mode and effect analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to expand upon results of a previously piloted patient perception survey with Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA), to identify areas within pharmacist-managed clinics needing improvement. METHODS: The survey was adapted for use in pharmacist-managed clinics. Patients completed the survey following regularly scheduled pharmacist appointments. Data were analyzed with a method adapted from HFMEA. Product scores could range from five to 25. A product of five indicates that pharmacists are doing a good job on the items that patients place the most value on, while a product score of 25 indicates that pharmacists are doing a poor job. A score greater than or equal to ten was used to identify areas for improvement. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients completed surveys. Thirteen components were assessed and no item achieved a mean product greater than or equal to ten. The survey item with the highest mean product pertained to discussion of potential medication side effects (mean: 7.06; interquartile range: 5-10). Analysis of each survey item found that all survey items had multiple individual responses that provided a product score of greater than or equal to ten. The survey items most frequently listed in the overall population as being most valued were "Told you the name of each of your medicines and what they are used for", "Answered your questions fully," and "Explained what your medicines do". CONCLUSIONS: Educational components provided during pharmacist-managed clinic appointments are aligned with patients' needs and are successfully incorporating the components that patients value highly in a patient-healthcare provider interaction. The HFMEA model can be an important teaching tool to identify specific processes in need of improvement and to help enhance pharmacists' self-efficacy, which may further improve patient care.

Survey of pharmacist-managed primary care clinics using healthcare failure mode and effect analysis / Estudio de consultas de atención primaria gestionadas por farmacéuticos usando el análisis de modos y efectos de fallos en salud

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to expand upon results of a previously piloted patient perception survey with Healthcare Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (HFMEA), to identify areas within pharmacist-managed clinics needing improvement. METHODS: The survey was adapted for use in pharmacist-managed clinics. Patients completed the survey following regularly scheduled pharmacist appointments. Data were analyzed with a method adapted from HFMEA. Product scores could range from five to 25. A product of five indicates that pharmacists are doing a good job on the items that patients place the most value on, while a product score of 25 indicates that pharmacists are doing a poor job. A score greater than or equal to ten was used to identify areas for improvement. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients completed surveys. Thirteen components were assessed and no item achieved a mean product greater than or equal to ten. The survey item with the highest mean product pertained to discussion of potential medication side effects (mean: 7.06; interquartile range: 5-10). Analysis of each survey item found that all survey items had multiple individual responses that provided a product score of greater than or equal to ten. The survey items most frequently listed in the overall population as being most valued were "Told you the name of each of your medicines and what they are used for", "Answered your questions fully," and "Explained what your medicines do". CONCLUSIONS: Educational components provided during pharmacist-managed clinic appointments are aligned with patients' needs and are successfully incorporating the components that patients value highly in a patient-healthcare provider interaction. The HFMEA model can be an important teaching tool to identify specific processes in need of improvement and to help enhance pharmacists' self-efficacy, which may further improve patient care (AU)

OBJETIVOS: El objetivo primario fue profundizar sobre los resultados de un cuestionario pre-pilotado de percepciones de los pacientes con el análisis de modos y efectos de fallos en salud (HFMEA) para identificar áreas en las que las consultas de farmacéuticas necesitan mejorar. MÉTODOS: El cuestionario fue adaptado para su uso en consultas farmacéuticas. Los pacientes cubrieron el cuestionario después de las citas farmacéuticas acordadas. Los datos se analizaron usando un método adaptado del HFMEA. Las puntuaciones de producto podían oscilar de 5 a 25. Un producto de 5 indicaba que el farmacéutico estaba realizando un buen trabajo en los ítems que el paciente valorizaba más, mientras que una puntuación de 25 indicaba que el farmacéutico estaba haciendo un mal trabajo. Se utilizaron las puntuaciones de 10 o más para identificar áreas de mejoría. RESULTADOS: 71 pacientes completaron cuestionarios. Se evaluaron 33 componentes y ningún ítem alcanzó un producto medio mayor o igual a 10. El punto de la encuesta que alcanzó la media más alta trataba de la discusión de los potenciales efectos secundarios de la medicación (media: 7.06; rango intercuartilico: 5-10). El análisis de cada ítem del cuestionario encontró que todos los ítems tenían varias respuestas individuales que proporcionaban una puntuación igual o mayor de 10. Los ítems más frecuentemente considerados por la población total como siendo los más valorados fueron "le dijo el nombre de todos sus medicamentos y para que se usan", "respondió completamente sus preguntas" y "explico lo que hacen los medicamentos". CONCLUSIONES: Los componentes educativos proporcionados en las visitas a las consultas farmacéuticas se alinean con las necesidades de los pacientes e incorporan con éxito los componentes que los pacientes valoran más en la interacción paciente-profesional de la salud. El modelo HFMEA puede ser una importante herramienta educativa para identificar procesos específicos que necesitan mejorar y para ayudar a aumentar la autoeficacia de los farmacéuticos, lo que podrá en el futuro mejorar la atención a pacientes (AU)

A virtual clean room to teach USP 797 regulations for intravenous medications.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a virtual environment for pharmacy students to learn United States Pharmacopeia Chapter 797 (USP 797) requirements, while recognizing the role of pharmacists in the safe use of intravenous (IV) medications. DESIGN: A virtual laboratory was created that included stations for IV medications, product verification, medication safety, and patient cases pertaining to high-alert medications. Pharmacy students used 3-D glasses and a wireless controller to navigate through the session and identify violations of USP 797 regulations. ASSESSMENT: Pre-assessments and post-assessments were administered to students who completed the session in each of the 2 years it was offered. In the first year, 88% of students strongly agreed or agreed that the sessions met their expectation. Following their APPE clerkship, 92% of these students felt the virtual IV room prepared them for the IV clean room experience. In the second year, 88% of students felt the experience enhanced their understanding of clean room procedures. After session completion, 75% of participants perceived medication errors to be more significant. Written examinations also were administered and students' mean scores improved significantly compared to those of students' prior to implementation of the session (89.6% in year 0; 91.2% in year 1; and 96.1% in year 2). CONCLUSION: The immersive virtual environment is a contemporary and effective way to teach USP 797 requirements and enhance the awareness of medication errors.