The training experience of primary care pharmacists

Objectives — To map the tasks, activities and training provision for primary care pharmacists (PCPs) and to identify perceived future training needs. Methods — Survey undertaken in 1998/1999 using a pre-piloted, postal, self-completion questionnaire to two samples of PCPs. Setting — PCPs in (a) the West Midlands and (b) England (outside West Midlands). Key findings — The response rate was 66 per cent. A majority (68 per cent) had worked in the role for less than two years. Eighty per cent had some form of continuing education or training for the role although only 50 per cent had a formal qualification. Over two-thirds had contributed to the funding of their training, with one-third providing all funding. Seventy-four per cent of PCPs agreed that pharmacists should go through a procedure to ensure competence (accreditation) before being allowed to work for a general medical practice or primary care group. Views on the need for formal education/training prior to work differed: 82 per cent of those with formal qualifications, but only 46 per cent of those without, considered that this should be a requirement. There was general agreement that training/education had met training needs. Views on future training closely reflected previous training experiences, with a focus upon pharmaceutical roles rather than upon generic skill development and the acquisition of management skills. Conclusions — The study provides a snapshot in time of the experience of pioneer PCPs and the training available to them. PCPs will need further training or updating if they are to provide the wider roles required by the developing needs of the National Health Service. Consideration should be given to formal recognition of the training of PCPs in order to assure competence. The expectation that pharmacists should fund their own training is likely to be a barrier to uptake of training and uncertainties over funding will militate against consistency of training.

Delivering optometric care in the UK

Optometrists play an important part in delivering eye care in the United Kingdom; however opportunities for practitioners to extend their role through co-management of patients with ophthalmologists vary across the country. Devolution in Scotland and Wales has led to greater emphasis on community based care in these regions. This thesis reviews the current situation and, by examining ophthalmic outpatient clinic data, discusses further opportunities to reduce demands on secondary care and the cost savings that can be made. To assess whether the profession is currently in a position to adopt an extended clinical role, changes in the availability of optometric instrumentation are assessed over a two year period. An increased prevalence of fundus cameras and contact tonometers places optometrists in a good position to take on further responsibilities in glaucoma management, however future investment could be impacted by the current economic climate as value for money became increasingly important to practitioners looking to purchase equipment. Methods of training optometrists in the necessary skills to utilise new technology to extend their role are evaluated in terms of both learning and cost effectiveness. Interactive distance learning is proposed as a convenient and effective method to deliver continuing professional development. Any changes to optometric practice must take account of the need for a sustainable business and the importance of attracting and retaining patients. The views of patients are assessed through a validated service quality questionnaire, SERVQUAL. The questionnaire is found to be valid for use in an optometry setting. Patients have a generally positive view of the service quality they receive from their optical practice and consider the intangible aspects, in particular responsiveness and empathy, most important. Optometrists are well placed to increase their role in patient management; however a viable business model must exist to enable investment in instrumentation and training.

Proplyene glycol intake from medications used on paediatric intensive care

here is an increasing number of reports of propylene glycol (PG) toxicity in the literature, regardless of its inclusion on the Generally Recognized as Safe List (GRAS).1 PG is an excipient used in many medications as a solvent for water-insoluble drugs. Polypharmacy may increase PG exposure in vulnerable PICU patients who may accumulate PG due to compromised liver and renal function. The study aim was to quantify PG intake in PICU patients and attitudes of clinicians towards PG. Method A snapshot of 50 PICU patients oral or intravenous medication intake was collected. Other data collected included age, weight, diagnosis, lactate levels and renal function. Manufacturers were contacted for PG content and then converted to mg/kg. Excipients in formulations that compete with the PG metabolism pathway were recorded. The Intensivists' opinions on PG intake was sought via e-survey. Results The 50 patients were prescribed 62 drugs and 83 formulations, 43/83 (52%) were parenteral formulations. Median weight of the patients was 5.5 kg (range 2–50 kg), ages ranged from 1 day to 13 years of age. Eleven of the patients were classed as renally impaired (defined as 1.5 times the baseline creatinine). Sixteen formulations contained PG, 2/16 were parenteral, 6/16 unlicensed preparations. Thirty-eight patients received at least one prescription containing PG and 29/38 of these patients were receiving formulations that contained excipients that may have competed with the metabolic pathways of PG. PG intake ranged from 0.002 mg/kg/day to 250 mg/kg/day. Total intake was inconclusive for 2 patients due to a of lack of availability of information from the manufacturer; these formulations were licensed but used in for off-label indications. Five commonly used formulations contributed to higher intakes of PG, namely co-trimoxazole, dexamethasone, potassium chloride, dipyridamole and phenobarbitone. Lactate levels were difficult to interpret due to the underlying conditions of the patients. One of the sixteen intensivist was aware of PG content in drugs, 16/16 would actively change therapy if intake was above European Medicines Agency recommendations. Conclusions Certain formulations used on PICU can considerably increase PG exposure to patients. Due to a lack of awareness of PG content, these should be highlighted to the clinician to assist with making informed decisions regarding risks versus benefits in continuing that drug, route of administration or formulation.

Proplyene glycol intake from medications used on paediatric intensive care

There is an increasing number of reports of propylene glycol (PG) toxicity in the literature, regardless of its inclusion on the Generally Recognized as Safe List (GRAS).1 PG is an excipient used in many medications as a solvent for water-insoluble drugs. Polypharmacy may increase PG exposure in vulnerable PICU patients who may accumulate PG due to compromised liver and renal function. The study aim was to quantify PG intake in PICU patients and attitudes of clinicians towards PG. Method A snapshot of 50 PICU patients oral or intravenous medication intake was collected. Other data collected included age, weight, diagnosis, lactate levels and renal function. Manufacturers were contacted for PG content and then converted to mg/kg. Excipients in formulations that compete with the PG metabolism pathway were recorded. The Intensivists' opinions on PG intake was sought via e-survey. Results The 50 patients were prescribed 62 drugs and 83 formulations, 43/83 (52%) were parenteral formulations. Median weight of the patients was 5.5 kg (range 2–50 kg), ages ranged from 1 day to 13 years of age. Eleven of the patients were classed as renally impaired (defined as 1.5 times the baseline creatinine). Sixteen formulations contained PG, 2/16 were parenteral, 6/16 unlicensed preparations. Thirty-eight patients received at least one prescription containing PG and 29/38 of these patients were receiving formulations that contained excipients that may have competed with the metabolic pathways of PG. PG intake ranged from 0.002 mg/kg/day to 250 mg/kg/day. Total intake was inconclusive for 2 patients due to a of lack of availability of information from the manufacturer; these formulations were licensed but used in for off-label indications. Five commonly used formulations contributed to higher intakes of PG, namely co-trimoxazole, dexamethasone, potassium chloride, dipyridamole and phenobarbitone. Lactate levels were difficult to interpret due to the underlying conditions of the patients. One of the sixteen intensivist was aware of PG content in drugs, 16/16 would actively change therapy if intake was above European Medicines Agency recommendations. Conclusions Certain formulations used on PICU can considerably increase PG exposure to patients. Due to a lack of awareness of PG content, these should be highlighted to the clinician to assist with making informed decisions regarding risks versus benefits in continuing that drug, route of administration or formulation.

Propylene glycol intake from medications used on paediatric intensive care

Background: There are increasing reports of propylene glycol (PG) toxicity, which is used in many medications as a solvent for water-insoluble drugs. Polypharmacy may increase PG exposure in vulnerable PICU patients who may accumulate PG due to compromised liver and renal function. The study aim was to quantify PG intake in PICU patients and attitudes of clinicians towards PG. Methods: A snapshot of 50 patients’ medication intake was collected. Other data collected included age, weight, diagnosis, lactate levels and renal function. Manufacturers were contacted for PG content and then converted to mg/kg. Excipients in formulations that compete with the PG metabolism pathway were recorded. The Intensivists opinions on PG intake was sought via e-survey. Results: The 50 patients were prescribed 62 drugs and 83 formulations, 43/83 (52 %) were parenteral formulations. Sixteen formulations contained PG, 2/16 were parenteral, 6/16 unlicensed preparations. Thirty-eight patients received drugs with PG. PG intake ranged from 0.002 mg/kg/day to 250 mg/kg/day, with 29/38 receiving formulations with concomitant pathway competing excipients. The total amount could not be quantified in two cases due to lack of availability of information from the manufacturer. Four commonly used formulations contributed to higher intakes of PG. Only 1/16intensivists was aware of PG content in drugs, 16/16 would actively change therapy if intake was above European Medicines Agency recommendations. Conclusions: Certain formulations used on PICU can considerably increase PG exposure to patients. These should be highlighted to the clinician to make an informed decision regarding risks versus benefits in continuing that drug or formulation.