Attitudes, barriers and facilitators of hospital pharmacists conducting practice-based research: a systematic review

Introduction: Practice-based research is essential in enhancing medication knowledge, quality use of medicines, the scope of the pharmacy profession and improving patient outcomes. This systematic review aims to uncover the attitudes of hospital pharmacists towards practice-based research and their perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to undertaking practice-based research. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases from 1 January 2000 to 11 March 2021 was conducted. Peer-reviewed empirical studies exploring hospital pharmacists’ perceptions of – as well as barriers and facilitators to – practice-based research were included and a descriptive synthesis used to identify common themes. Results: Nine studies were included in this review. Barriers and facilitators across four broad themes were related to pharmacist capacity and capability, workplace environment, research resources, and research culture. Hospital pharmacists had a high interest in conducting research, but limited research experience. Common barriers identified were lack of time, workplace support, funding, research culture, and competing priorities. Having a post-graduate qualification and a positive attitude towards research facilitated research participation. Departmental support, designated research time and creation of research networks and forums were seen as facilitators for practice-based research. Conclusion: Hospital pharmacists recognise the importance of practice-based research in improving knowledge, patient care and advancing pharmacy practice. However, large variation has been reported for their confidence and experience in practice-based research. Building research capacity and capability by supporting post-graduate research qualification, providing designated time and creating research networks may strengthen the research culture amongst hospital pharmacists

Statewide cross-sectional survey of emergency departments\u27 adoption and implementation of the Ohio opioid prescribing guidelines and opioid prescribing practices

Study objective To evaluate the implementation of the Ohio Emergency and Acute Care Facility Opioids and Other Controlled Substances Prescribing Guidelines and their perceived impact on local policies and practice. Methods The study design was a cross-sectional survey of emergency department (ED) medical directors, or appropriate person identified by the hospital, perception of the impact of the Ohio ED Opioid Prescribing Guidelines on their departments practice. All hospitals with an ED in Ohio were contacted throughout October and November 2016. Distribution followed Dillman’s Tailored Design Method, augmented with telephone recruitment. Hospital chief executive officers were contacted when necessary to encourage ED participation. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the impact of opioid prescribing policies on prescribing practices. Results A 92% response rate was obtained (150/163 EDs). In total, 112 (75%) of the respondents stated that their ED has an opioid prescribing policy, is adopting one or is implementing prescribing guidelines without a specific policy. Of these 112 EDs, 81 (72%) based their policy on the Ohio ED Opioid Prescribing Guidelines. The majority of respondents strongly agreed/agreed that the prescribing guidelines have increased the use of the prescription drug monitoring programme (86%) and have reduced inappropriate opioid prescribing (71%). Conclusion This study showed that the Ohio ED Opioid Prescribing Guidelines have been widely disseminated and that the majority of EDs in Ohio are using them to develop local policies. The majority of respondents believed that the Ohio opioid prescribing guidelines reduced inappropriate opioid prescribing. However, prescribing practices still varied greatly between EDs

A benchmarking scoping review of research output from hospital pharmacy departments in Australia

Aim: To benchmark annual research output from hospital pharmacy departments in Australian principal referral hospitals. Data sources: Embase, Medline, and Scopus. Study selection: All 29 principal referral hospitals listed by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare were searched using the institution field from 2018–2020. Articles were included if an author was affiliated with a hospital pharmacy department. Conference abstracts, letters, narrative reviews, opinions, commentaries, or editorials were excluded. Results: A total of 261 research articles were identified from 27 principal referral hospital pharmacy departments from 2018–2020. Median research output over 3 years was five (interquartile range, 3–9) articles. In terms of annual research, hospital pharmacy departments in the 50th and 90th percentile for total publication output published two and ten original research articles every year, respectively. Overall, 56% (n = 145) of the published studies were observational, 35% (n = 90) had a first author with a pharmacy department affiliation, 97% (n = 252) had at least one author with a university affiliation, and in 5% (n = 12) of the articles there was more than one hospital pharmacy department affiliation. Conclusion: On average, hospital pharmacy departments in Australian principal referral hospitals publish two original research articles every year. Nearly all of these articles are published in collaborations with universities

Do dividends signal future earnings in the Nordic stock markets?

We study the informational content of dividends on three Nordic civil law markets, where other simultaneous but blurring motives for dividends may be weaker. Using aggregate data on real earnings per share and payout ratios, long time series from 1969 to 2010, and methodologies which address problems of endogeneity, non-stationarity and autocorrelation (including a Vector Error Correction Model approach), we find evidence on dividend signaling in Nordic markets. However, we also find heterogeneity in the relationship between dividends and earnings on markets similar in many respects, suggesting that even small variations in the institutional surroundings may be important for the results