Pharmacists in dispensing drugs (PharmDisp): protocol for a clinical trial to test the effectiveness of distance education in training pharmacists for dispensing drugs

<div><p>ABSTRACT Dispensing drug is a moment in which the pharmacist is able to analyze pharmacotherapy and contribute to its rational use. However, research has shown that some pharmacists lack adequate knowledge to perform this service. This study aims to describe a research protocol for a clinical trial to test the effectiveness of a distance learning program to train pharmacists in dispensing drugs. This is a protocol for an open diagnostic, non-randomized, single group clinical trial. A 12-week duration distance learning course was structured on the Moodle platform for training community pharmacists who are registered in the Regional Board of Pharmacy and work as employees or owners in Brazilian community pharmacies. The course curricula involves concepts and practice of dispensing drugs applied to the treatment of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia and asthma. Pharmacists are divided randomly into groups, to which previously selected tutors give directions to the discussion and clarify questions. A validated questionnaire is being used before and after the course to measure participants’ knowledge. Participant satisfaction with the course is also being measured. Pharmacists who work in the study headquarters municipality receive two visits from a mystery shopper, before and after the course, to evaluate their performance in dispensing drugs. The virtual platform and the content of the course material were evaluated by judges. The study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the School of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo. The sample size was estimated to provide desired power for testing the significance of the difference between baseline-to-endpoint change scores. Information about the course is being released through channels such as social networks. The results will be submitted for publication in scientific journals, but information enabling the identification of the study subjects will be kept confidential. The trial has been registered in The Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry with number RBR7mbrp3 on January 15th, 2015.</p></div

Use of Simulated Patients to Evaluate Combined Oral Contraceptive Dispensing Practices of Community Pharmacists

<div><p>Background</p><p>Combined oral contraceptive (COC) use is the most commonly used reversible method of birth control. The incorrect use of COCs is frequent and one of the most common causes of unintended pregnancies. Community pharmacists (CPs) are in a strategic position to improve COC use because they are the last health professional to interact with patients before drug use.</p> <p>Objective</p><p>To evaluate the COC dispensing practices of CPs in a developing country.</p> <p>Method</p><p>A cross-sectional study was conducted in community pharmacies of Assis and Ourinhos microregions, Brazil, between June 1, 2012, and October 30, 2012. Four simulated patients (SPs) (with counseled audio recording) visited community pharmacies with a prescription for Ciclo 21^® (a COC containing ethinyl estradiol 30 mcg + levonorgestrel 15 mcg). The audio recording of every SP visit was listened to independently by 3 researchers to evaluate the COC dispensing practice. The percentage of CPs who performed a screening for safe use of COCs (i.e., taking of patients’ medical and family history, and measuring of blood pressure) and provided counseling, as well as the quality of the screening and counseling, were evaluated.</p> <p>Results</p><p>Of the 185 CPs contacted, 41 (22.2%) agreed to participate in the study and finished the study protocol. Only 3 CPs asked the SP a question (1 question asked by each professional), and all of the questions were closed-ended, viz., “do you smoke?” (n = 2) and “what is your age?” (n = 1). None of the CPs measured the patient’s blood pressure. Six CPs provided counseling when dispensing COCs (drug dosing, 5 CPs; possible adverse effects, 2 CPs), and one CP provided counseling regarding both aspects.</p> <p>Conclusion</p><p>The CPs evaluated did not dispense COC appropriately and could influence in the occurrence of negatives therapeutic outcomes such as adverse effects and treatment failure.</p> </div