Exploring the baseline knowledge and experience of healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom on Novel Psychoactive Substances

Submitted 28 january 2020. Reviwers' comments received 11 February 2020. Accepted 26 February 2020. Published 2 March 2020.Objective: This survey aimed to explore knowledge and experience on novel psychoactive substances (NPS) of healthcare professionals (HCPs). The study also aimed to assess how HCPs would like to improve their knowledge of NPS. Methods: Seventy paper questionnaires were disseminated in 2017 within continuing education events to pharmacists, nurses and general practitioners (GPs). Additionally, 127 online surveys were completed using the Qualtrics platform by other HCPs and mental health nurses in six United Kingdom (UK) independent mental health hospitals long-stay in-patient rehabilitation services. Two educational sessions involving pharmacists and GPs were also held in late 2017 and mid-2018. Knowledge of NPS by HCPs was evaluated prior to the start of the educational events. Evaluation forms were handed out post-sessions to garner feedback, especially on areas for improvement for future sessions. Statistical analysis of data was undertaken using SPSS (V.25). Results: Most HCPs reported only 'basic' to 'intermediate' NPS knowledge. Substance misuse service staff felt more informed, were more often consulted and had greater confidence regarding NPS compared to hospital and primary care professionals. A negative association was found between the age of the HCP and knowledge of NPS. Most participants expressed a need for regular training and updates as insufficient NPS-related information is currently received. Conclusions: An improvement within the self-reported knowledge of HCPs on NPS is evident in comparison to previous studies. Continued education of HCPs on NPS is fundamental for the provision of improved harm reduction services, which can enhance overall care for NPS service users.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

DOOP Kit, Domestic Bin Or Watery Grave? A Study Investigating Disposal Practices Of Transdermal Drug Delivery Products In Care Homes

yesBackground The issue of opioid use and misuse is current and topical at present with reports of opioid epidemics in the USA and the increasing use of opioids in other parts of the world. The New Scientist asserted that America was in the throes of an opioid epidemic with reports of fatalities linked to physical contact with fentanyl. Discussions have progressed from an American focus to speculating on the spread of this issue to UK cities, Glasgow in particular. Safety issues have more recently come to light regarding the physical application and management of specific drug forms e.g. opioid transdermal patches (OTPs). The prescribing, application and safe disposal of OTPs within both healthcare settings and personal dwellings is critical to the effective use of these products. Healthcare professionals have a duty of care and responsibility to ensure the safe application and disposal of OTPs. Aims The aims of this study were to 1) gain insight into current practices of healthcare professionals regarding OTPs (fentanyl and buprenorphine) disposal practices and 2) identify Abstract knowledge and system awareness surrounding the disposal of these products in care home settings. Methods We decided to focus on care homes due to the estimated high prevalence of prescribing of OTPs in these care settings. The study was undertaken by the University of Bradford School of Pharmacy in 2015 and the participant sample focussed on the North of England (UK). Results The findings (based on 56 survey responses) displayed a significant variation in current disposal practices and a lack of specific working policies. We unearthed anomalies in the participants’ knowledge of the active ingredient volume held in depleted patches which, if not disposed of correctly, can lead to harm. This has highlighted the need for more thorough training and education on the safe and effective management of OTPs. Conclusions Further education and training is needed regarding safe disposal practices of OTPs, with the suggestion of pharmacist-led interventions. This will minimise confusion and reinforce safe disposal practices (denaturing products) and support the reduction of unsafe disposal practices (domestic waste or flushing)

Prophylaxis pharmacotherapy to prevent the onset of post traumatic brain injury depression: a systematic review

YesBackground: Depression is a common psychiatric problem following traumatic brain injury (TBI) with reported prevalence rates of 30-77% in the first year post-TBI. Given the negative influence of post-TBI depression on cognition, interpersonal, social, physical and occupational functioning; early initiation of pharmacotherapy to prevent post-TBI depression has been considered. This systematic review will synthesize the available evidence from published studies on the effectiveness and harms of pharmacotherapy for the secondary prevention of post-TBI depression. Method: Studies published before November 2017 were reviewed. Six databases were searched, with additional searching of key additional documents. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated for methodological quality. Results: Six articles addressing five studies met inclusion criteria. Study designs included three randomised controlled trials (RCT), two retrospective cohorts and one case-control. Prophylactic pharmacotherapy included antidepressants, beta-blockers and statins. In one RCT, the number-needed-to-treat with sertraline to prevent one case of depression post-TBI at 24 weeks was 5.9 (95%CI: 3.1-71.1). Prescribing beta-blockers prior to TBI reduced the depression risk regardless of the specific brain trauma. TBI patients with pre-existing hyperlipidemia not treated with statins had an increased depression risk compared to those without hyperlipidemia. Conclusion: Early initiation of sertraline prophylaxis in nondepressed TBI patients shows promise to reduce the odds of post-TBI depression developing. However, in the absence of rigorous study of tolerability, existing data are insufficient to recommend sertraline prophylaxis. Optimal timing and treatment duration with identification of patients most likely to benefit from prophylaxis require further consideration. Dedicated prospective studies assessing the effects of beta-blockers and statins on post-TBI depression are required.The Transport Accident Commission (TAC), through the Institute for Safety, Compensation and Recovery Research (ISCRR) at Monash University, provided funding for this review

Towards an understanding of the burdens of medication management affecting older people: the MEMORABLE realist synthesis

Background More older people are living in the community with multiple diagnoses and medications. Managing multiple medications produces issues of unrivalled complexity for those involved. Despite increasing literature on the subject, gaps remain in understanding how, why and for whom complex medication management works, and therefore how best to improve practice and outcomes. MEMORABLE, MEdication Management in Older people: Realist Approaches Based on Literature and Evaluation, aimed to address these gaps. Methods MEMORABLE used realism to understand causal paths within medication management. Informed by RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: and Evolving Standards) guidelines, MEMORABLE involved three overlapping work packages: 1) Realist Review of the literature (24 articles on medication management exploring causality); 2) Realist Evaluation (50 realist-informed interviews with older people, family carers and health and care practitioners, explaining their experiences); and 3) data synthesis and theorising from 1) and 2). Results Medication management was viewed from the perspective of ‘implementation’ and structured into five stages: identifying a problem (Stage 1), getting a diagnosis and/or medications (Stage 2), starting, changing or stopping medications (Stage 3), continuing to take medications (Stage 4), and reviewing/reconciling medications (Stage 5). Three individual stages (1, 3 and 4) are conducted by the older person sometimes with family carer support when they balance routines, coping and risk. Stages 2 and 5 are interpersonal where the older person works with a practitioner-prescriber-reviewer, perhaps with carer involvement. Applying Normalisation Process Theory, four steps were identified within each stage: 1) sense making: information, clarification; 2) action: shared-decision-making; 3) reflection/monitoring; and 4) enduring relationships, based on collaboration and mutual trust. In a detailed analysis of Stage 5: Reviewing/reconciling medications, adopting the lens of ‘burden’, MEMORABLE identified five burdens amenable to mitigation: ambiguity, concealment, unfamiliarity, fragmentation and exclusion. Two initial improvement propositions were identified for further research: a risk screening tool and individualised information. Conclusions Older people and family carers often find medication management challenging and burdensome particularly for complex regimens. Practitioners need to be aware of this potential challenge, and work with older people and their carers to minimise the burden associated with medication management. Trial registration PROSPERO 2016:CRD42016043506

Medication management in older people: the MEMORABLE realist synthesis

Background The number and proportion of older people in the UK are increasing, as are multimorbidity (potentially reducing quality of life) and polypharmacy (increasing the risk of adverse drug events). Together, these complex factors are challenging for older people, informal carers, and health and care practitioners. Objectives MEMORABLE (MEdication Management in Older people: Realist Approaches Based on Literature and Evaluation) aimed to understand how medication management works and propose improvements. Design A realist approach informed three work packages, combining a realist review of secondary data with a realist evaluation of primary interview data, in a theory-driven, causal analysis. Setting The setting was in the community. Participants Older people, informal carers, and health and care practitioners. Interventions Studies relating to medication management and to reviewing and reconciling medications; and realist-informed interviews. Main outcome measures Not applicable. Data sources MEDLINE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and EMBASE were searched (all searched from January 2009 to July 2017; searched on 1 August 2017). Supplementary articles were identified by the Research Team. Data were also obtained through interviews. Review methods Searches of electronic databases were supplemented by citation-tracking for explanatory contributions, as well as accessing topic-relevant grey literature. Following RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines, articles were screened and iteratively analysed with interview data, to generate theory-informed (normalisation process theory) explanations. Results Developing a framework to explain medication management as a complex intervention across five stages: identifying problem (Stage 1), starting, changing or stopping medications (Stage 3) and continuing to take medications (Stage 4), where older people, sometimes with informal carers, make individual decisions and follow routines that fit medication management into their day-to-day lives, engendering a sense of control. In getting diagnosis and/or medications (Stage 2) and reviewing/reconciling medications (Stage 5), older people and practitioners share decision-making in time-limited contacts: involving four steps – sense-making, relationships, action and reflection/monitoring (normalisation process theory); and conceptualising burden – through a detailed analysis of Stage 5, generating a theoretical framework and identifying five burden types amendable to mitigation: ambiguity, concealment, unfamiliarity, fragmentation and exclusion. Proposing interventions: risk identification – a simple way of identifying older people and informal carers who are not coping, at risk and who need appropriate help and support; and individualised information – a short, personalised record and reference point, co-produced and shared by older people, informal carers and practitioners that addresses the experience of living with multimorbidities and polypharmacy. Limitations Few studies directly address the complexity of medication management as a process and how it works. Limitations included, having identified the overall complexity, the need to focus the analysis on reviewing/reconciling medications (Stage 5), the exclusion of non-English-language literature, the focus on non-institutionalised populations and the broad definition of older people. Conclusions MEMORABLE explored the complexity of medication management. It highlighted the way interpersonal stages in the medication management process, notably reviewing/reconciling medications, contribute to the mitigation of burdens that are often hidden. Future work Co-produced studies to scope and trial the two proposed interventions; studies to extend the detailed understanding of medication management, linked to burden mitigation; and a study to clarify the medication management outcomes wanted by older people, informal carers and practitioners. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016043506

Benzodiazepines for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation

YesCochrane Incentive Grant from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

Rapid realist review of the role of community pharmacy in the public health response to COVID-19

INTRODUCTION: Community pharmacists and their teams have remained accessible to the public providing essential services despite immense pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic. They have successfully expanded the influenza vaccination programme and are now supporting the delivery of the COVID-19 vaccination roll-out. AIM: This rapid realist review aims to understand how community pharmacy can most effectively deliver essential and advanced services, with a focus on vaccination, during the pandemic and in the future. METHOD: An embryonic programme theory was generated using four diverse and complementary documents along with the expertise of the project team. Academic databases, preprint services and grey literature were searched and screened for documents meeting our inclusion criteria. The data were extracted from 103 documents to develop and refine a programme theory using a realist logic of analysis. Our analysis generated 13 context-mechanism-outcome configurations explaining when, why and how community pharmacy can support public health vaccination campaigns, maintain essential services during pandemics and capitalise on opportunities for expanded, sustainable public health service roles. The views of stakeholders including pharmacy users, pharmacists, pharmacy teams and other healthcare professionals were sought throughout to refine the 13 explanatory configurations. RESULTS: The 13 context-mechanism-outcome configurations are organised according to decision makers, community pharmacy teams and community pharmacy users as key actors. Review findings include: supporting a clear role for community pharmacies in public health; clarifying pharmacists' legal and professional liabilities; involving pharmacy teams in service specification design; providing suitable guidance, adequate compensation and resources; and leveraging accessible, convenient locations of community pharmacy. DISCUSSION: Community pharmacy has been able to offer key services during the pandemic. Decision makers must endorse, articulate and support a clear public health role for community pharmacy. We provide key recommendations for decision makers to optimise such a role during these unprecedented times and in the future

Working together: reflections on how to make public involvement in research work

YesThe importance of involving members of the public in the development, implementation and dissemination of research is increasingly recognised. There have been calls to share examples of how this can be done, and this paper responds by reporting how professional and lay researchers collaborated on a research study about falls prevention among older patients in English acute hospitals. It focuses on how they worked together in ways that valued all contributions, as envisaged in the UK standards for public involvement for better health and social care research. The paper is itself an example of working together, having been written by a team of lay and professional researchers. It draws on empirical evidence from evaluations they carried out about the extent to which the study took patient and public perspectives into account, as well as reflective statements they produced as co-authors, which, in turn, contributed to the end-of-project evaluation. Lay contributors' deep involvement in the research had a positive effect on the project and the individuals involved, but there were also difficulties. Positive impacts included lay contributors focusing the project on areas that matter most to patients and their families, improving the quality and relevance of outcomes by contributing to data analysis, and feeling they were 'honouring' their personal experience of the subject of study. Negative impacts included the potential for lay people to feel overwhelmed by the challenges involved in achieving the societal or organisational changes necessary to address research issues, which can cause them to question their rationale for public involvement. The paper concludes with practical recommendations for working together effectively in research. These cover the need to discuss the potential emotional impacts of such work with lay candidates during recruitment and induction and to support lay people with these impacts throughout projects; finding ways to address power imbalances and practical challenges; and tips on facilitating processes within lay groups, especially relational processes like the development of mutual trust.Funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) Programme (Project Number NIHR129488)

Characterisation of aggregates of cyclodextrin-drug complexes using Taylor Dispersion Analysis

There is a need to understand the nature of aggregation of cyclodextrins (CDs) with guest molecules in increasingly complex formulation systems. To this end an innovative application of Taylor dispersion analysis (TDA) and comparison with dynamic light scattering (DLS) have been carried out to probe the nature of ICT01-2588 (ICT-2588), a novel tumor-targeted vascular disrupting agent, in solvents including a potential buffered formulation containing 10% hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin. The two hydrodynamic sizing techniques give measurement responses are that fundamentally different for aggregated solutions containing the target molecule, and the benefits of using TDA in conjunction with DLS are that systems are characterised through measurement of both mass- and z-average hydrodynamic radii. Whereas DLS measurements primarily resolve the large aggregates of ICT01-2588 in its formulation medium, methodology for TDA is described to determine the size and notably to quantify the proportion of monomers in the presence of large aggregates, and at the same time measure the formulation viscosity. Interestingly TDA and DLS have also distinguished between aggregate profiles formed using HP-β-CD samples from different suppliers. The approach is expected to be widely applicable to this important class of drug formulations where drug solubility is enhanced by cyclodextrin and other excipients

Allergen immunotherapy for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis : a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) is in the process of developing Guidelines on Allergen Immunotherapy (AIT) for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis. In order to inform the development of clinical recommendations, we undertook a systematic review to assess the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and safety of AIT in the management of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis METHODS: We searched 15 international biomedical databases for published, in progress and unpublished evidence. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers against pre-defined eligibility criteria and critically appraised using established instruments. Our primary outcomes of interest were symptom, medication and combined symptom and medication scores. Secondary outcomes of interest included cost-effectiveness and safety. Data were descriptively summarized and then quantitatively synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: We identified 5932 studies of which 160 studies satisfied our eligibility criteria. There was a substantial body of evidence demonstrating significant reductions in standardized mean differences (SMD) of symptom (SMD -0.53, 95%CI -0.63, -0.42), medication (SMD -0.37, 95%CI -0.49, -0.26) and combined symptom and medication (SMD -0.49, 95%CI -0.69, -0.30) scores whilst on treatment that were robust to pre-specified sensitivity analyses. There was in comparison a more modest body of evidence on effectiveness post-discontinuation of AIT, this suggesting a benefit in relation to symptom scores. CONCLUSIONS: AIT is effective in improving symptom, medication and combined symptom and medication scores in patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis whilst on treatment, and there is some evidence suggesting that these benefits are maintained in relation to symptom scores after discontinuation of therapy. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved