Matching Adherence Interventions to Patient Determinants Using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Introduction: Despite much research, interventions to improve medication adherence report disappointing and inconsistent results. Tailored approaches that match interventions and patient determinants of non-adherence were seldom used in clinical trials. The presence of a multitude of theoretical frameworks and models to categorize interventions and patient determinants complicated the development of common categories shared by interventions and determinants. We retrieved potential interventions and patient determinants from published literature on medication adherence, matched them like locks and keys, and categorized them according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Methods: We identified the most relevant literature reviews on interventions and determinants in a pragmatic literature search, extracted all interventions and determinants, grouped similar concepts to umbrella terms and assigned them to TDF categories. All steps were finalized in consensus discussion between the authors. Results: Sixteen articles (5 with determinants, 11 with interventions) were included for analysis. We extracted 103 interventions and 42 determinants that we divided in 26 modifiable and 16 unmodifiable determinants. All interventions and modifiable determinants were matched within 11 categories (Knowledge; Skills; Social/professional role and identity; Beliefs about capabilities; Beliefs about consequences; Intentions; Memory, Attention and decision processes; Environmental context and resources; Social influences; Emotion; and Behavioral regulation). Conclusion: In published trials on medication adherence, the congruence between interventions and determinants can be assessed with matching interventions to determinants. To be successful, interventions in medication adherence should target current modifiable determinants and be tailored to the unmodifiable determinants. Modifiable and unmodifiable determinants need to be assessed at inclusion of intervention studies to identify the patients most in need of an adherence intervention. Our matched categories may be useful to develop interventions in trials that investigate the effectiveness of adherence interventions

Clinical relevance and implementation into daily practice of pharmacist-prescribed medication for the management of minor ailments

Background: Autonomous pharmacist prescribing was legally introduced in Switzerland in 2019 with the reclassification from prescription medication to pharmacist prescribing of 105 medications for sixteen indications. Its aim was to limit medical consultations and healthcare costs.Objectives: To evaluate the clinical relevance of the pharmacy prescribing medications compared to the over-the-counter medications (OTCs) and to evaluate its implementation into daily practice.Methods: A comparison was undertaken by clinical pharmacists to evaluate chemical and galenical equivalences between pharmacy prescribing medications and OTCs using compendium. ch and pharmavista. ch. Then, a scoping review was carried out in October 2021 to determine clinical relevance according to clinical guidelines’ recommendations. Clinical relevance was completed by determining if pharmacy prescribing medications were part of a homogeneous therapeutic class (no differences in efficacy and safety considered in clinical guidelines, but rather inter-molecular differences) that included an OTC medication. To identify the most clinically relevant pharmacy prescribing medications, first-line treatments were considered. The implementation into daily practice in Swiss community pharmacies was evaluated through an online questionnaire distributed via e-mail from the national pharmacists’ association and LinkedIn®. It included 15 questions divided in: pharmacy demographics, experience on pharmacy prescribing, use of prescribing medications and opinion about the them.Results: Of the 105 pharmacy prescribing medications, 20 (19.0%) were first-line treatments without OTC equivalences. Six of them were OTCs reclassified for safety reasons. Ten medications (9.5%) showed a negative clinical relevance (they were not first-line therapeutic options to support pharmacist when managing patients or considered as to be avoided) compared to the OTCs available. For the questionnaire, 283 pharmacists from the German (40.3%), French (37.1%) and Italian-speaking regions (16.9%) answered. In the previous 6 months, 41.7% pharmacies had delivered 10–50 medications and 30.0% between 1 and 10 medications. In situations where patients could be equally treated with a pharmacy prescribing medication or OTC (with an identical OTC, similar OTC or an OTC for the same therapeutic group): 75.6%, 74.9% and 84.8% of pharmacists, respectively, would have chosen OTCs because it required less documentation and it did not require patients’ payment for the service. In addition, pharmacists’ lack of training was also mentioned as barrier for providing the service.Conclusion: Most pharmacist prescribing medications do not present clinical advantages compared to OTCs. In addition, other barriers for implementation were also pharmacists’ training and patient medications costs

Farmland biodiversity and agricultural management on 237 farms in 13 European and two African regions

Farmland is a major land cover type in Europe and Africa and provides habitat for numerous species. The severe decline in farmland biodiversity of the last decades has been attributed to changes in farming practices, and organic and low-input farming are assumed to mitigate detrimental effects of agricultural intensification on biodiversity. Since the farm enterprise is the primary unit of agricultural decision making, management-related effects at the field scale need to be assessed at the farm level. Therefore, in this study, data were collected on habitat characteristics, vascular plant, earthworm, spider, and bee communities and on the corresponding agricultural management in 237 farms in 13 European and two African regions. In 15 environmental and agricultural homogeneous regions, 6–20 farms with the same farm type (e.g., arable crops, grassland, or specific permanent crops) were selected. If available, an equal number of organic and non-organic farms were randomly selected. Alternatively, farms were sampled along a gradient of management intensity. For all selected farms, the entire farmed area was mapped, which resulted in total in the mapping of 11 338 units attributed to 194 standardized habitat types, provided together with additional descriptors. On each farm, one site per available habitat type was randomly selected for species diversity investigations. Species were sampled on 2115 sites and identified to the species level by expert taxonomists. Species lists and abundance estimates are provided for each site and sampling date (one date for plants and earthworms, three dates for spiders and bees). In addition, farmers provided information about their management practices in face-to-face interviews following a standardized questionnaire. Farm management indicators for each farm are available (e.g., nitrogen input, pesticide applications, or energy input). Analyses revealed a positive effect of unproductive areas and a negative effect of intensive management on biodiversity. Communities of the four taxonomic groups strongly differed in their response to habitat characteristics, agricultural management, and regional circumstances. The data has potential for further insights into interactions of farmland biodiversity and agricultural management at site, farm, and regional scale

DataSheet1_Clinical relevance and implementation into daily practice of pharmacist-prescribed medication for the management of minor ailments.PDF

Background: Autonomous pharmacist prescribing was legally introduced in Switzerland in 2019 with the reclassification from prescription medication to pharmacist prescribing of 105 medications for sixteen indications. Its aim was to limit medical consultations and healthcare costs.Objectives: To evaluate the clinical relevance of the pharmacy prescribing medications compared to the over-the-counter medications (OTCs) and to evaluate its implementation into daily practice.Methods: A comparison was undertaken by clinical pharmacists to evaluate chemical and galenical equivalences between pharmacy prescribing medications and OTCs using compendium. ch and pharmavista. ch. Then, a scoping review was carried out in October 2021 to determine clinical relevance according to clinical guidelines’ recommendations. Clinical relevance was completed by determining if pharmacy prescribing medications were part of a homogeneous therapeutic class (no differences in efficacy and safety considered in clinical guidelines, but rather inter-molecular differences) that included an OTC medication. To identify the most clinically relevant pharmacy prescribing medications, first-line treatments were considered. The implementation into daily practice in Swiss community pharmacies was evaluated through an online questionnaire distributed via e-mail from the national pharmacists’ association and LinkedIn®. It included 15 questions divided in: pharmacy demographics, experience on pharmacy prescribing, use of prescribing medications and opinion about the them.Results: Of the 105 pharmacy prescribing medications, 20 (19.0%) were first-line treatments without OTC equivalences. Six of them were OTCs reclassified for safety reasons. Ten medications (9.5%) showed a negative clinical relevance (they were not first-line therapeutic options to support pharmacist when managing patients or considered as to be avoided) compared to the OTCs available. For the questionnaire, 283 pharmacists from the German (40.3%), French (37.1%) and Italian-speaking regions (16.9%) answered. In the previous 6 months, 41.7% pharmacies had delivered 10–50 medications and 30.0% between 1 and 10 medications. In situations where patients could be equally treated with a pharmacy prescribing medication or OTC (with an identical OTC, similar OTC or an OTC for the same therapeutic group): 75.6%, 74.9% and 84.8% of pharmacists, respectively, would have chosen OTCs because it required less documentation and it did not require patients’ payment for the service. In addition, pharmacists’ lack of training was also mentioned as barrier for providing the service.Conclusion: Most pharmacist prescribing medications do not present clinical advantages compared to OTCs. In addition, other barriers for implementation were also pharmacists’ training and patient medications costs.</p

Table1_Clinical relevance and implementation into daily practice of pharmacist-prescribed medication for the management of minor ailments.XLSX

Background: Autonomous pharmacist prescribing was legally introduced in Switzerland in 2019 with the reclassification from prescription medication to pharmacist prescribing of 105 medications for sixteen indications. Its aim was to limit medical consultations and healthcare costs.Objectives: To evaluate the clinical relevance of the pharmacy prescribing medications compared to the over-the-counter medications (OTCs) and to evaluate its implementation into daily practice.Methods: A comparison was undertaken by clinical pharmacists to evaluate chemical and galenical equivalences between pharmacy prescribing medications and OTCs using compendium. ch and pharmavista. ch. Then, a scoping review was carried out in October 2021 to determine clinical relevance according to clinical guidelines’ recommendations. Clinical relevance was completed by determining if pharmacy prescribing medications were part of a homogeneous therapeutic class (no differences in efficacy and safety considered in clinical guidelines, but rather inter-molecular differences) that included an OTC medication. To identify the most clinically relevant pharmacy prescribing medications, first-line treatments were considered. The implementation into daily practice in Swiss community pharmacies was evaluated through an online questionnaire distributed via e-mail from the national pharmacists’ association and LinkedIn®. It included 15 questions divided in: pharmacy demographics, experience on pharmacy prescribing, use of prescribing medications and opinion about the them.Results: Of the 105 pharmacy prescribing medications, 20 (19.0%) were first-line treatments without OTC equivalences. Six of them were OTCs reclassified for safety reasons. Ten medications (9.5%) showed a negative clinical relevance (they were not first-line therapeutic options to support pharmacist when managing patients or considered as to be avoided) compared to the OTCs available. For the questionnaire, 283 pharmacists from the German (40.3%), French (37.1%) and Italian-speaking regions (16.9%) answered. In the previous 6 months, 41.7% pharmacies had delivered 10–50 medications and 30.0% between 1 and 10 medications. In situations where patients could be equally treated with a pharmacy prescribing medication or OTC (with an identical OTC, similar OTC or an OTC for the same therapeutic group): 75.6%, 74.9% and 84.8% of pharmacists, respectively, would have chosen OTCs because it required less documentation and it did not require patients’ payment for the service. In addition, pharmacists’ lack of training was also mentioned as barrier for providing the service.Conclusion: Most pharmacist prescribing medications do not present clinical advantages compared to OTCs. In addition, other barriers for implementation were also pharmacists’ training and patient medications costs.</p

Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Obstructive Sleep Apnea Improves Blood Pressure and Cardiovascular Function.

UNLABELLED Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a frequent syndrome characterized by intermittent hypoxemia and increased prevalence of arterial hypertension and cardiovascular morbidity. In OSA, the presence of patent foramen ovale (PFO) is associated with increased number of apneas and more severe oxygen desaturation. We hypothesized that PFO closure improves sleep-disordered breathing and, in turn, has favorable effects on vascular function and arterial blood pressure. In 40 consecutive patients with newly diagnosed OSA, we searched for PFO. After initial cardiovascular assessment, the 14 patients with PFO underwent initial device closure and the 26 without PFO served as control group. Conventional treatment for OSA was postponed for 3 months in both groups, and polysomnographic and cardiovascular examinations were repeated at the end of the follow-up period. PFO closure significantly improved the apnea-hypopnea index (ΔAHI -7.9±10.4 versus +4.7±13.1 events/h, P=0.0009, PFO closure versus control), the oxygen desaturation index (ΔODI -7.6±16.6 versus +7.6±17.0 events/h, P=0.01), and the number of patients with severe OSA decreased significantly after PFO closure (79% versus 21%, P=0.007). The following cardiovascular parameters improved significantly in the PFO closure group, although remained unchanged in controls: brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation, carotid artery stiffness, nocturnal systolic and diastolic blood pressure (-7 mm Hg, P=0.009 and -3 mm Hg, P=0.04, respectively), blood pressure dipping, and left ventricular diastolic function. In conclusion, PFO closure in OSA patients improves sleep-disordered breathing and nocturnal oxygenation. This translates into an improvement of endothelial function and vascular stiffening, a decrease of nighttime blood pressure, restoration of the dipping pattern, and improvement of left ventricular diastolic function. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01780207