Pharmaceutical systematics: Description and preliminary investigation of an alternative method for structuring drug information

Objectives: To identify the 30 most common adverse drug events or reactions (ADE/ADRs) within the top 200 medications: (1) by raw incidence, (2) weighted by prescription volume, (3) and weighted by retail dollars. Methods: The Pharmacy Times Top 200 Medications (as ranked by prescription volume) was utilized to identify the top 200 medications in 2008. The ADE/ADRs for each medication were obtained from Facts and Comparisons, Micromedex, and Lexi-Comp and entered into a database. These ADE/ADRs were compiled and summed, identifying the number of times each appeared. These then were ranked to identify the 30 most common ADE/ADRs. The actual prescription volume and total retail dollars for each medication were obtained and listed next to each medication's ADE/ADR. The incidence of each ADE/ADR then was weighted by actual prescription volume and retail dollars to determine the top 30 most common ADE/ADRs. Results: Initial evaluation resulted in 9829 individual ADE/ADRs and summed into 1477 distinct ADE/ADRs, after adjusting for interchangeable terminology. Examples of the 30 most common ADE/ADRs (raw incidence) included: dizziness/vertigo, headache, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea/loose stools. The list remained the same after weighting by actual prescription volume. After weighting by retail dollars, the order of ADE/ADRs changed slightly. Conclusion: Knowledge of ADE/ADRs is important for pharmacists in all healthcare settings. Consolidating ADE/ADRs for medications may enable pharmacists to recall the most common side effects and aid in earlier identification of ADE/ADRs, which may positively impact patient safety across practice settings. Type: Original Researc

Prescribers' perspectives: The impact of the controlled substance scheduling system on providing optimal patient care

Background: In the United States, the scheduling system for controlled substances was established by the Controlled Substance Act of 1970. In 2009, Parker et al. published the study “Physicians' knowledge and attitudes toward scheduling.” Since 2009, the opioid epidemic has gathered national attention from social and scientific perspectives as the number of drug overdose deaths in the United States has nearly tripled. Objective: To follow up on a 2009 survey by Parker, et al. to determine prescribers' knowledge and attitudes regarding the controlled substance scheduling system and assess the impact of the controlled substance scheduling system on providing optimal patient care. Methods: The cross-sectional survey was designed to assess prescribers' attitudes and mailed to 400 randomly selected physicians and 400 randomly selected nurse practitioners. Results: Prescribers across all groups provided consistent responses suggesting an overall lack of understanding of controlled substance regulations, a negative attitude towards the controlled substance scheduling system, and a detrimental effect on providing optimal patient care. Responses from nurse practitioners differed significantly from physicians in 75 % (3 of the 4) questions regarding regulations, suggesting nurse practitioners possess a greater understanding of pharmaceutical regulations. Specialists' responses demonstrated an enhanced level of dissatisfaction regarding the controlled substance scheduling system compared to primary care providers in 75 % (3 of the 4) questions. Questions regarding the impact of the scheduling system on prescribing patterns differed significantly across multiple demographic groups, notably between physicians and nurse practitioners, differences in practice setting, and primary state of practice for 75 % (3 of the 4) questions. Conclusions: The results of this survey confirm the findings of Parker, et al., and further display the need for investigation into how to improve the controlled substance scheduling system in the United States

Pharmaceutical Systematics: Description and Preliminary Investigation of an Alternative Method for Structuring Drug Information

Objectives: To identify the 30 most common adverse drug events or reactions (ADE/ADRs) within the top 200 medications: (1) by raw incidence, (2) weighted by prescription volume, (3) and weighted by retail dollars. Methods: The Pharmacy Times Top 200 Medications (as ranked by prescription volume) was utilized to identify the top 200 medications in 2008. The ADE/ADRs for each medication were obtained from Facts and Comparisons, Micromedex, and Lexi-Comp and entered into a database. These ADE/ADRs were compiled and summed, identifying the number of times each appeared. These then were ranked to identify the 30 most common ADE/ADRs. The actual prescription volume and total retail dollars for each medication were obtained and listed next to each medication’s ADE/ADR. The incidence of each ADE/ADR then was weighted by actual prescription volume and retail dollars to determine the top 30 most common ADE/ADRs. Results: Initial evaluation resulted in 9829 individual ADE/ADRs and summed into 1477 distinct ADE/ADRs, after adjusting for interchangeable terminology. Examples of the 30 most common ADE/ADRs (raw incidence) included: dizziness/vertigo, headache, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea/loose stools. The list remained the same after weighting by actual prescription volume. After weighting by retail dollars, the order of ADE/ADRs changed slightly. Conclusion: Knowledge of ADE/ADRs is important for pharmacists in all healthcare settings. Consolidating ADE/ADRs for medications may enable pharmacists to recall the most common side effects and aid in earlier identification of ADE/ADRs, which may positively impact patient safety across practice setting

125 Community Socioeconomic Status Is Associated with Social Participation Outcomes

Abstract Introduction Socioeconomic factors are recognized as important social determinants of health. Data however are sparse describing the relationship between socioeconomic status and long term burn outcomes. This study aims to examine associations between community-level socioeconomic status and social participation outcomes in burn survivors. Methods Data was obtained from the Life Impact Burn Recovery Evaluation (LIBRE) Journey study that assesses longitudinal social participation outcomes of community dwelling burn survivors. Subjects were linked to the Distressed Communities Index (DCI), which combines seven indicators into a metric that depicts community economic well-being. Participants were categorized by time since burn (&amp;lt; 5, 5-15, ≥15 years). Linear regression models examined associations between DCI (zip code and county levels) and LIBRE domain scores (Family &amp; Friends, Social Interactions, Social Activities, Work &amp; Employment). Results The study included 314 burn survivors, (mean age 44.1 years; 61.0% female; 48.6% married; 82.8% white). The population was distributed among the time since injury categories (&amp;lt; 5: 35.8%, 5-15: 27.5%, ≥15: 36.7%). Approximately 18% of subjects were categorized in the “at risk” or “distressed” DCI categories. For survivors less than five years from burn, a DCI score increase of 1 standard deviation (worse socioeconomic status) at the zip code level was associated with decreased Family &amp; Friends and Social Activity scores of 2.6 (p=.01) and 2.0 points (p=0.04), respectively (small effect sizes). This relationship was even stronger when controlling for sociodemographic factors. In regression analysis, survivors within the first five years from injury living in “at risk” or “distressed” communities showed worse Family &amp; Friend scores by 6.5 points compared to those living in “prosperous” communities, even after adjusting for age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, and marital status (p=0.04; moderate effect size). There were no significant associations between DCI and LIBRE domain scores for survivors assessed beyond 5 years from injury. Conclusions Social participation outcomes were worse in burn survivors who lived in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Burn survivors who face socioeconomic challenges may need additional support to address social disparities to improve outcomes. </jats:sec