Audit report on the South Central Iowa Regional E-911 Service Board for the year ended June 30, 2005

Audit report on the South Central Iowa Regional E-911 Service Board for the year ended June 30, 2005

Audit report on the South Central Iowa Regional E-911 Service Board for the year ended June 30, 2004

Audit report on the South Central Iowa Regional E-911 Service Board for the year ended June 30, 2004

Audit report on the South Central Iowa Regional E-911 Service Board for the year ended June 30, 2015

Audit report on the South Central Iowa Regional E-911 Service Board for the year ended June 30, 2015

A Comparative Study: Service Animals and Emotional Support Animals under the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act & An Overview of Assistance Animal Laws of Select States, April 18, 2010

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA) prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability and govern the use of service or emotional support animals in places where pets may not be permitted. However, courts have been struggling with how to define and treat animals that qualify for protection under each law. This has created confusion as to what rights and duties are owed disabled persons and the animals that live with or accompany them. This essay attempts to clarify these two federal laws with regard to service or emotional support animals and the differing parties‘ rights and interests. It also includes an overview of select state laws that govern assistance animals of all types and our recommendations for enhancing the Iowa Civil Rights Act.

Report on a special investigation of the City of Garwin Ambulance Service for the period July 1, 2010 through March 31, 2015

Report on a special investigation of the City of Garwin Ambulance Service for the period July 1, 2010 through March 31, 2015

Effectiveness of a drug dosing service provided by community pharmacists in polymedicated elderly patients with renal impairment a comparative study

Background: Drug dosing errors are common in renal-impaired patients. Appropriate dosing adjustment and drug selection is important to ensure patients" safety and to avoid adverse drug effects and poor outcomes. There are few studies on this issue in community pharmacies. The aims of this study were, firstly, to determine the prevalence of dosing inadequacy as a consequence of renal impairment in patients over 65 taking 3 or more drug products who were being attended in community pharmacies and, secondly, to evaluate the effectiveness of the community pharmacist"s intervention in improving dosing inadequacy in these patients when compared with usual care. Methods: The study was carried out in 40 Spanish community pharmacies. The study had two phases: the first, with an observational, multicentre, cross sectional design, served to determine the dosing inadequacy, the drug-related problems per patient and to obtain the control group. The second phase, with a controlled study with historical control group, was the intervention phase. When dosing adjustments were needed, the pharmacists made recommendations to the physicians. A comparison was made between the control and the intervention group regarding the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy and the mean number of drug-related problems per patient. Results: The mean of the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy was 17.5% [95% CI 14.6-21.5] in phase 1 and 15.5% [95% CI 14.5-16.6] in phase 2. The mean number of drug-related problems per patient was 0.7 [95% CI 0.5-0.8] in phase 1 and 0.50 [95% CI 0.4-0.6] in phase 2. The difference in the prevalence of dosing inadequacy between the control and intervention group before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.73% [95% CI (−6.0) - 7.5] and after the pharmacists" intervention it was 13.5% [95% CI 8.0 - 19.5] (p < 0.001) while the difference in the mean of drug-related problems per patient before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.05 [95% CI( -0.2) - 0.3] and following the intervention it was 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 - 0.7] (p < 0.001). Conclusion: A drug dosing adjustment service for elderly patients with renal impairment in community pharmacies can increase the proportion of adequate drug dosing, and improve the drug-related problems per patient. Collaborative practice with physicians can improve these results.

Effectiveness of a drug dosing service provided by community pharmacists in polymedicated elderly patients with renal impairment a comparative study

Background: Drug dosing errors are common in renal-impaired patients. Appropriate dosing adjustment and drug selection is important to ensure patients" safety and to avoid adverse drug effects and poor outcomes. There are few studies on this issue in community pharmacies. The aims of this study were, firstly, to determine the prevalence of dosing inadequacy as a consequence of renal impairment in patients over 65 taking 3 or more drug products who were being attended in community pharmacies and, secondly, to evaluate the effectiveness of the community pharmacist"s intervention in improving dosing inadequacy in these patients when compared with usual care. Methods: The study was carried out in 40 Spanish community pharmacies. The study had two phases: the first, with an observational, multicentre, cross sectional design, served to determine the dosing inadequacy, the drug-related problems per patient and to obtain the control group. The second phase, with a controlled study with historical control group, was the intervention phase. When dosing adjustments were needed, the pharmacists made recommendations to the physicians. A comparison was made between the control and the intervention group regarding the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy and the mean number of drug-related problems per patient. Results: The mean of the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy was 17.5% [95% CI 14.6-21.5] in phase 1 and 15.5% [95% CI 14.5-16.6] in phase 2. The mean number of drug-related problems per patient was 0.7 [95% CI 0.5-0.8] in phase 1 and 0.50 [95% CI 0.4-0.6] in phase 2. The difference in the prevalence of dosing inadequacy between the control and intervention group before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.73% [95% CI (−6.0) - 7.5] and after the pharmacists" intervention it was 13.5% [95% CI 8.0 - 19.5] (p < 0.001) while the difference in the mean of drug-related problems per patient before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.05 [95% CI( -0.2) - 0.3] and following the intervention it was 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 - 0.7] (p < 0.001). Conclusion: A drug dosing adjustment service for elderly patients with renal impairment in community pharmacies can increase the proportion of adequate drug dosing, and improve the drug-related problems per patient. Collaborative practice with physicians can improve these results.