A survey of UK dental health professionals using a medicines information service: what questions do they ask and do they get useful answers?

NSW Cannabis Medicines Advisory Service preliminary survey results - Enquirer perceptions and patient outcomes

Background

In 2018, an innovative, State government‐funded cannabis medicines drug information service was established for health professionals in New South Wales (NSW). The NSW Cannabis Medicines Advisory Service (CMAS) provides expert clinical guidance and support to medical practitioners considering prescribing a cannabis medicine to their patient(s).

Aims

This research examines quality assurance and patient outcomes related to enquirers' experience with NSW CMAS.

Methods

Data collection involved an online, anonymous survey with two components. Following a health professional enquiry, quality assurance data were collected about the enquirers' experience with NSW CMAS. The second survey focussed on patient outcomes and provides real‐world observational data about cannabis medicines safety and effectiveness across a wide range of indications.

Results

Data collection occurred between January 2020 and June 2021. Preliminary analyses were based on 68 quality assurance and 50 patient outcomes survey responses. General practitioners represented the highest proportion of survey responses (n = 33; 49%). The most common enquiry involved ‘patient‐specific advice’ (n = 50; 74%). Patient‐specific information provided by the service was mainly used for prescribing decision support (n = 45; 90%).

Conclusions

Preliminary findings highlight the impact of an innovative cannabis medicines drug information service in supporting health professional clinical practice in an area of rapid knowledge translation. Quality assurance data indicate that the service is perceived well by the majority of enquirers. Patient outcomes data across a wide range of indications suggest some effectiveness and a reasonable safety profile for prescribed cannabis medicines for most patients.

Assessment of drug-prescribing perception and practice among dental care providers: a cross-sectional Lebanese study

Background:

Dentists play an essential role in providing high-quality dental care, taking into consideration the clinical context and concomitant medications taken by the patients.

Objective:

This study aimed to assess drug-prescribing perception and practices in addition to drug-related educational needs among Lebanese dentists; it also evaluated the need for interprofessional collaboration between dentists and pharmacists.

Methods:

An exploratory cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire targeted a sample of dentists from all Lebanese districts. Participants gave their consent by accepting to complete the survey (ethics approval reference: USJ-2016-63). The questionnaire consisted of closed-ended questions exploring: 1) drug-prescribing perception, 2) drug-prescribing practice, and 3) collaboration with pharmacists regarding their respective roles in providing appropriate counseling to patients. Two indexes were created: the first evaluated self-confidence in prescribing medications, and the second assessed dentists’ confidence in pharmacists. Logistic regressions were performed, taking each index as a dependent variable.

Results

A total of 137 dentists completed the survey (59% females; mean age: 42.17; SD: 13.78 years). The majority had a fair to good perceived knowledge in pharmacology and therapeutics (80.3%), only 30.7% reported to be sufficiently equipped to prescribe safely. Dentists exhibited particularly low perceived knowledge about prescribing in elderly patients, dosing, medication use in pregnancy, drug interactions, and adverse reactions. Dentists specialized in periodontics had the lowest odds of having self-confidence in prescribing drugs (aOR=0.25; p<0.001). Also, 64.3% declared that they routinely check a reference source before prescribing, and 78% relied on pharmaceutical companies and medical representatives to get information on medications. While 61% declared that pharmacists should provide oral care counseling, only half of them encouraged their patients to talk to their pharmacists about their medications. Only 15% considered that patients are getting enough counseling from the pharmacist, with a global confidence index below the median value, suggesting the need for more collaboration, especially with periodontists who exhibited the lowest confidence in pharmacists (aOR=0.45).

Conclusions

Lebanese dentists reported some lack of knowledge and confidence in prescribing practices. Education, training, and close collaboration between pharmacists and dentists are essential to overcome these problems and avoid potential harm to patients.

Therapeutic enquiries about biological agents as a tool to identify safety aspects and patterns of use

Background

Biotechnological agents (BA) are increasingly being used in clinical practice. We aimed to determine, whether enquiries about them to a therapeutic consultation service have also become more frequent, and to describe the information requested in these consultations.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 14 104 therapeutic consultations collected in a computerised database between 2000 and 2014. Enquiries about BA (monoclonal antibodies, fusion proteins or cytokine antagonists) were chosen. Information on the type of BA, underlying condition, type of enquiry and affiliation of the enquirer was retrieved and compared with data from consultations about other agents.

Results

During the study period, 365 enquiries about 30 different BA were received. Only 4% of them were received before 2004, while 48.8% were received after 2010. Rituximab, infliximab, adalimumab and etanercept were most frequently enquired about. Agent selection (n=184) and/or adverse effects (n=174) were the most frequent reasons for making an enquiry. Most enquiries about an agent selection were made about an off-label use (n=164), mainly for systemic autoimmune diseases (n=61). Over half of the enquiries about adverse effects were about their teratogenic potential (n=96). Enquiries about BA more often requested an opinion (87.7% vs 77.7%) were made by physicians (89.9% vs 76.9%), from a hospital (81.6% vs 44.5%) and regarded a specific patient (87.4% vs 74.5%).

Conclusions

Therapeutic consultations about BA are increasing. Most of them are related to uncertainties of health professionals regarding any new medicine: their off-label use, actual adverse effects or the teratogenic potential of the involved agents.