Search

This study aims to assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the consumption of self-care products for pediculosis capitis management, in Portugal. A segmented regression analysis of interrupted time series (March 2020) was performed from January 2017 to August 2023 to analyze the short- and long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the consumption of pediculicides and related products. Monthly rates of absolute consumption were estimated by community pharmacies’ dispensing records. Portuguese municipalities were organized into quintiles according to their purchasing power index and percentage of youth, to study the association of these social and demographic variables on the sale of these products. COVID-19 pandemic significantly reduced the sales of products indicated for pediculosis. Since the start of the pandemic, an absolute decrease of 21.0 thousand packages was observed in the monthly average consumption (p < 0.0001) compared to the pre-pandemic period. After this reduction, the average monthly trend increased in the pandemic period in comparison with the previous period, although not significant (267.0 packages per month, p = 0.1102). Regions with higher disposable income and more young people were associated with higher sales of these products. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has had a notable impact on the sales of self-care products for pediculosis capitis in Portugal, in the short term. The lockdowns and other isolation measures implemented to control the spread of the virus may have led to a decrease in the number of head lice cases, consequently resulting in a reduction in sales of products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Spontaneous reporting is the most used method to monitor post-marketing safety information. Although patient involvement in spontaneous reporting has increased overtime, little is known about factors associated with patients' adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting. Aim: To identify and assess the sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes and knowledge that influence spontaneous reporting and the reasons associated with ADR underreporting by patients. Method: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. A search on the MEDLINE and EMBASE scientific databases was performed to retrieve studies published between 1 January 2006 and 1 November 2022. Studies were included if they addressed knowledge and attitudes associated with ADR underreporting. Results: A total of 2512 citations were identified, of which 13 studies were included. Sociodemographic characteristics were frequently identified with ADR reporting in 6 studies, being age (3/13) and level of education (3/13) the most often reported. Older age groups (2/13) and individuals with higher level of education (3/13) were more likely to report ADRs. Underreporting was shown to be motivated by reasons related to knowledge, attitudes, and excuses. Ignorance (10/13), complacency (6/13), and lethargy (6/13) were the most frequent reasons for not reporting. Conclusion: This study highlighted the scarcity of research conducted with the aim of assessing ADR underreporting by patients. Knowledge, attitudes, and excuses were commonly observed in the decision to report ADRs. These motives are characteristics that can be changed; hence strategies must be designed to raise awareness, continually educate, and empower this population to change the paradigm of underreporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Underreporting is a major limitation of the voluntary reporting system of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). A 2009 systematic review showed the knowledge and attitudes of health professionals were strongly related with underreporting of ADRs. Objective: Our aim was to update our previous systematic review to determine factors (sociodemographic, knowledge and attitudes) associated with the underreporting of ADRs by healthcare professionals. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for studies published between 2007 and 2021 that met the following inclusion criteria: (1) published in English, French, Portuguese or Spanish; (2) involving health professionals; and (3) the goal was to evaluate factors associated with underreporting of ADRs through spontaneous reporting. Results: Overall, 65 papers were included. While health professional sociodemographic characteristics did not influence underreporting, knowledge and attitudes continue to show a significant effect: (1) ignorance (only serious ADRs need to be reported) in 86.2%; (2) lethargy (procrastination, lack of interest, and other excuses) in 84.6%; (3) complacency (the belief that only well tolerated drugs are allowed on the market) in 46.2%; (4) diffidence (fear of appearing ridiculous for reporting merely suspected ADRs) in 44.6%; and (5) insecurity (it is nearly impossible to determine whether or not a drug is responsible for a specific adverse reaction) in 33.8%, and the absence of feedback in 9.2%. In this review, the non-obligation to reporting and confidentiality emerge as new reasons for underreporting. Conclusions: Attitudes regarding the reporting of adverse reactions continue to be the main determinants of underreporting. Even though these are potentially modifiable factors through educational interventions, minimal changes have been observed since 2009. Clinical Trials Registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42021227944. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To describe and assess the impact of polypharmacy, and its potential adverse reactions; serious clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and inappropriate medicines (PIMs) on glycemic target, and kidney function in a sample of older adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Cross-sectional study was performed in a real-world database including 444 elderly people with T2D from the Portuguese Diabetes Association, aged ≥ 65 years, and registered in 2018. DDIs were analyzed using Micromedex drug-interaction platform and PIMs identified using STOPP criteria version-2. Results: Polypharmacy was identified in 43.6% of patients. This group of patients has shown to be more females (50 vs. 39.6%, P=0.0208), higher HbA1c targets (P=0.0275), longer diabetes duration (66.4 vs. 54.4%, P=0.0019), more hypertensive (87 vs. 62.9%, P<0.0001), using more insulin (38.1 vs. 26%, P=0.0062), sulfonylureas (37.1 vs. 15.6%, P<0.0001), GLP-1 receptor-agonists (9.7 vs. 3.6%, P=0.0077), metformin-DPP-4 inhibitors (41.2 vs. 29.2%, P=0.0081), and SGLT2 inhibitors (19 vs. 9.6%, P=0.0040). A total of 8.7% of patients had potentially serious clinically relevant DDIs, mainly due to interacting medicine pairs dexamethasone and fluoroquinolones. Furthermore, 23.4% had PIMs, and cardiovascular medicines accounted for largest therapeutic group associated. Polypharmacy found to be associated with twofold greater odds of having HbA1c ≤8%, whereas PIMs associated with 2.5-fold greater odds of having HbA1c ≤9%, and 5.5-folds greater odds of having severe kidney function. Conclusions: These findings suggested that there is a potential association between polypharmacy and PIMs and altered glycemic control, and PIMs with the deterioration of kidney function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]