Search

Aims: To determine the risk of liver injury associated with the use of different intravenous lipid emulsions (LEs) in large populations in a real-world setting in China.Methods: A prescription sequence symmetry analysis was performed using data from 2015 Chinese Basic Health Insurance for Urban Employees. Patients newly prescribed both intravenous LEs and hepatic protectors within time windows of 7, 14, 28, 42, and 60 days of each other were included. The washout period was set to one month according to the waiting-time distribution. After adjusting prescribing time trends, we quantify the deviation from symmetry of patients initiating LEs first and those initiating hepatic protectors first, by calculating adjusted sequence ratios (ASRs) and relevant 95% confidence intervals. Analyses were further stratified by age, gender, and different generations of LEs developed.Results: In total, 416, 997, 1,697, 2,072, and 2,342 patients filled their first prescriptions with both drugs within 7, 14, 28, 42, and 60 days, respectively. Significantly increased risks of liver injury were found across all time windows, and the strongest effect was observed in the first 2 weeks [ASR 6.97 (5.77–8.42) ∼ 7.87 (6.04–10.61)] in overall patients. In subgroup analyses, female gender, age more than 60 years, and soybean oil-based and alternative-LEs showed higher ASRs in almost all time windows. Specially, a lower risk for liver injury was observed in the first 14 days following FO-LEs administration (ASR, 3.42; 95% CI, 0.81–14.47), but the risk started to rise in longer time windows.Conclusion: A strong association was found between LEs use and liver injury through prescription sequence symmetry analysis in a real-world setting, which aligns with trial evidence and clinical experience. Differences revealed in the risks of liver injury among various LEs need further evaluation.

Aim To identify common drug-related problems (DRPs) during pharmacy intervention and consultation in an intensive care unit (ICU); to explore the gap between physicians and pharmacists on their understanding of each other's capabilities and needs. Method We conducted a single-center prospective study in the ICU of a tertiary academic hospital for 21 months. A pharmaceutical care (PC) model was implemented by a pharmacy team, and data were collected during pharmacy intervention and consultation. Data analysis was performed on identified DRPs, causes and their relationships. DRPs' frequency during intervention and consultation was compared. Problem-level descriptive analysis and network analysis were conducted using R 3.6.3. Result Implementation of PC model greatly improved the efficacy of pharmacists in both interventions proposed to solve DRPs (from 13.6 to 20.1 cases per month) and number of patients being closely monitored (from 7.7 to 16.9 per month). Pharmacists identified 427 DRPs during pharmacy intervention with primarily adverse drug events (ADEs, 34.7%) and effect of treatment not optimal (25.5%), and 245 DRPs during consultation (mainly ADEs, 58.4%). About three-fifths DRPs were caused by antibiotics. Comparing DRPs identified during pharmacy intervention and consultation, physicians consulted pharmacists more on questions related to medication safety, while pharmacists also paid attention to treatment effectiveness, which was consulted less commonly. Conclusion Implementation of PC model is beneficial in guiding pharmacy practice and improving efficacy especially under limited human resources. Physicians and pharmacists shall continue ensuring drug safety and be familiar with the scope of PC and clinical need for a better cooperation.

Background Though many countries, including China, are moving towards malaria elimination, malaria remains a major global health threat. Due to the spread of antimalarial drug resistance and the need for innovative medical products during the elimination phase, further research and development (R&D) of innovative tools in both epidemic and elimination areas is needed. This study aims to identify the trends and gaps in malaria R&D in China, and aims to offer suggestions on how China can be more effectively involved in global malaria R&D. Methods Quantitative analysis was carried out by collecting data on Chinese malaria-related research programmes between 1985 and 2014, invention patents in China from 1985 to 2014, and articles published by Chinese researchers in PubMed and Chinese databases from 2005 to 2014. All data were screened and extracted for numerical analysis and were categorized into basic sciences, drug/drug resistance, immunology/vaccines, or diagnostics/detection for chronological and subgroup comparisons. Results The number of malaria R&D activities have shown a trend of increase during the past 30 years, however these activities have fluctuated within the past few years. During the past 10 years, R&D on drug/drug resistance accounted for the highest percentages of research programmes (32.4%), articles (55.0% in PubMed and 50.6% in Chinese databases) and patents (45.5%). However, these R&D activities were mainly related to artemisinin. R&D on immunology/vaccines has been a continuous interest for China’s public entities, but the focus remains on basic science. R&D in the area of high-efficiency diagnostics has been rarely seen or reported in China. Conclusions China has long been devoted to malaria R&D in multiple areas, including drugs, drug resistance, immunology and vaccines. R&D on diagnostics has received significantly less attention, however, it should also be an area where China can make a contribution. More focus on malaria R&D is needed, especially in the area of diagnostics, if China would like to contribute in a more significant way to global malaria control and elimination. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40249-016-0222-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.