Search

Introduction Antidepressant use has increased over the last two decades, with Australia and New Zealand among the highest antidepressant users in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. Comorbidity and polypharmacy are common in antidepressant users, increasing the likelihood of interaction-related adverse drug events, which are frequently preventable. Aim We aimed to identify, profile, and analyse potential antidepressant drug-drug interactions in information-seeking antidepressant users. Methods We retrospectively analysed antidepressant-related drug-drug interaction enquiries from patients or carers who contacted a pharmacist-led Australian national medicines call centre over an 8-year period to determine patient characteristics, concomitant drugs involved, prevalence and type of antidepressant-related drug-drug interaction across life stages, and associated risks. Results Of 3899 antidepressant drug-drug interaction calls, the most frequent concomitant drugs were antipsychotics, opioids, benzodiazepines, and complementary medicines. Narrative analyses of 2011 calls identified 81.0% of patients with potential drug-drug interactions and 10.4% categorised with worrying symptoms. The most frequent drug-drug interaction risks were excessive sedation, increased anticholinergic effects, serotonin syndrome, and suicidal thoughts. Carers of children aged Discussion Antidepressant users often have information gaps and safety concerns regarding drug-drug interactions that motivate help-seeking behaviour. Symptoms and drug-drug interaction consequences may be underestimated in these patients. Primary care health professionals have a role in proactively addressing the risk of drug-drug interactions to support benefit-risk assessment and shared decision-making.

Objectives: Colonoscopy is integral in the early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC), be it for screening, diagnostic or therapeutic intentions. Despite the presence of multiple screening modalities, colonoscopy remains integral in providing a definitive CRC diagnosis. However, uptake rates remain low worldwide with minimal understanding towards stakeholders' perspectives. This systematic review is the first to outline the barriers and facilitators faced by providers and patients in receiving colonoscopy specifically., Methods: Using PRISMA guidelines, our systematic review consolidates findings from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science Core collection. All perceptions of healthcare providers and screening participants aged 45 and above towards colonoscopy were included., Results: Forty-five articles were included in our review. Five major analytical themes were identified - procedural perceptions, personal experiences, thoughts and concerns, societal influences, doctor-patient relationship and healthcare system. The discrepancies in knowledge between patients and providers have evidently reduced in the present decade, potentially attributable to the rising influence of social media. The sharing of providers' personal experiences, involvement of patients' family in colonoscopy recommendations and propagation of patients' positive recounts were also more apparent in the past compared to the present decade, highlighting the need to reevaluate the balance between medical confidentiality and personal touch. Additionally, Asian patients were reportedly more apathetic towards CRC diagnosis due to their strong belief in destiny, a crucial association consistent with present studies., Conclusion: This study highlights pertinent gaps in our healthcare system, providing crucial groundwork for interventions to be enacted in engendering higher colonoscopy uptake rates., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Today, male and female adult and pediatric cancer patients, individuals transitioning between gender identities, and other individuals facing health extending but fertility limiting treatments can look forward to a fertile future. This is, in part, due to the work of members associated with the Oncofertility Consortium., Methods: The Oncofertility Consortium is an international, interdisciplinary initiative originally designed to explore the urgent unmet need associated with the reproductive future of cancer survivors. As the strategies for fertility management were invented, developed or applied, the individuals for who the program offered hope, similarly expanded. As a community of practice, Consortium participants share information in an open and rapid manner to addresses the complex health care and quality-of-life issues of cancer, transgender and other patients. To ensure that the organization remains contemporary to the needs of the community, the field designed a fully inclusive mechanism for strategic planning and here present the findings of this process., Results: This interprofessional network of medical specialists, scientists, and scholars in the law, medical ethics, religious studies and other disciplines associated with human interventions, explore the relationships between health, disease, survivorship, treatment, gender and reproductive longevity., Conclusion: The goals are to continually integrate the best science in the service of the needs of patients and build a community of care that is ready for the challenges of the field in the future.

Lidocaine-based teething gels have been widely available in Australia for decades in both commercial preparations and those compounded by pharmacies. However, many case reports have highlighted potential risks and toxicity associated with lidocaine-based teething gels when used in infants and young children, including seizures, respiratory arrest and death. The Australian and New Zealand Society of Paediatric Dentistry and the American Academy of Paediatrics do not recommend topical agents for teething, and the US Food and Drug Administration does not recommend topical lidocaine for this purpose due to concerns of toxicity. Literature supporting the efficacy of lidocaine for teething is scant and difficult to interpret due to the flawed design of the trials conducted and varied formulations used. This opinion article aims to summarise the available literature showing the limited effectiveness and associated risks of topical lidocaine gels for use in teething. In light of these findings, the authors recommend that regulatory bodies such as the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration review the efficacy and safety of this type of medicine and consider removing the indication for teething or limiting the age of use to older children., (© 2020 Paediatrics and Child Health Division (The Royal Australasian College of Physicians).)