Evaluation of a joint workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists: a retrospective cross-sectional survey

BACKGROUND

Although pharmacists often identify numerous clinical questions, they face several barriers, including the lack of mentors for research activities in clinical settings. Therefore, a workshop for the appropriate selection of a study design, which is a fundamental first step, may be necessary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists. Moreover, the characteristics of pharmacists with little involvement in research activities were extracted using decision-tree analysis to guide the design of future workshops.

METHODS

A workshop was conducted on October 1, 2023. It comprised three parts: lectures, group work, and presentations. Questionnaire-based surveys were conducted with workshop participants regarding their basic information, their background that influenced research activities, their satisfaction, and their knowledge/awareness. For the questions on knowledge/awareness, the same responses were requested before and after the workshop using a five-scale scoring system. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors influencing research activities. Decision tree analysis was performed to extract low-effort characteristics of the research activities.

RESULTS

Of the 40 workshop attendees, the overall satisfaction score for the workshop was 4.38 of 5, and the score for each question was 4 or higher. Significant increases were observed in the scores of knowledge/awareness after the workshop. Moreover, 95% of the pharmacists answered that it would be highly useful to conduct a joint workshop between hospitals and community pharmacists. Although independent influencing factors were not detected in the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the decision tree analysis revealed that pharmacists who were no member of an academic society (85%, 11/13) or members without any certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice (80%, 4/5) were the least active in clinical research. In contrast, those belonging to academic societies and holding certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice frequently conducted clinical research.

CONCLUSION

The present study revealed that a joint workshop on study design may have the potential to change pharmacists' knowledge and awareness of research activities. Moreover, future workshops should be conducted with pharmacists who do not belong to academic societies.

Impact of the number of repeated inhalations and patient characteristics on the residual amount of inhaled laninamivir octanoate hydrate dry powder in pediatric patients with influenza

BACKGROUND

A dry powder inhaled formulation is used for the anti-influenza drug laninamivir octanoate hydrate (laninamivir). Although two successive inhalations (puffs) are recommended to minimize residual amounts of active ingredients, previous reports suggest that pediatric patients with low peak inspiratory flow are unable to inhale the active ingredient adequately. In the present study, we prospectively investigated the appropriate number of repeated inhalations of laninamivir dry powder and factors influencing the residual amount of ingredients in pediatric patients with influenza.

METHODS

The study enrolled 64 patients receiving laninamivir dry powder inhaler (Inavir®) between January and March 2016 at Tsu emergency medical center/pediatric clinic and dental clinic. All patients enrolled used a laninamivir dry powder inhaler in four repeated inhalations, as instructed by a pharmacist. The residual amount of laninamivir dry powder was calculated by measuring the device weight before and after each inhalation and a residual amount of >20% was defined as an unsuccessful inhalation.

RESULTS

The inadequate inhalation rate after two successive inhalations was 45%, and it decreased as number of inhalation repeats increased, reaching 23% after four successive inhalations. Peak inspiratory flow in patients with inadequate inhalation was significantly lower than that in patients with adequate inhalation, for all numbers of inhalation repeats analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic analyses indicated peak inspiratory flow cut-off values of 140, 120, 100, and 100 L/min at 1-4 successive inhalations, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings suggest that a proportion of patients with low peak inspiratory flow were unable to inhale the active ingredient adequately when laninamivir dry powder inhaler was administered as two successive inhalations, as recommended in the instruction manual. Three or four repeated inhalations of laninamivir dry powder inhaler should be administered to pediatric patients with low peak inspiratory flow.