Intravenous versus Oral Acetaminophen for Pain: Systematic Review of Current Evidence to Support Clinical Decision-Making

The clinical effectiveness and value of camel milk as a therapeutic agent is currently unclear. MEDLINE (1946 to March 2016), EMBASE (1974 to March 2016), and Google Scholar were searched using the following terms: milk, bodily secretions, camels, camelus, camelini, camelidae, dromedary, bactrian camel, body fluid, and bodily secretions. Articles identified were reviewed if the study was investigating the use of camel milk for the potential treatment of diseases affecting humans. Of 430 studies, 24 were included after assessment. Identified studies highlighted treatment with camel milk of diseases, including diabetes, autism, cancer, various infections, heavy metal toxicity, colitis, and alcohol-induced toxicity. Although most studies using both the human and animal model do show a clinical benefit with an intervention and camel milk, limitations of these studies must be taken into consideration before widespread use. Based on the evidence, camel milk should not replace standard therapies for any indication in humans.

Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a major problem affecting up to 170 million people worldwide. Two protease inhibitors have recently been approved that will revolutionize treatment. Our objective was to summarize and evaluate the literature pertaining to the pharmacokinetics of boceprevir and telaprevir, in order to provide clinicians with insight into the management of actual and potential drug interactions. A standardized search using MEDLINE (1948-November 2011), EMBASE (1980-November 2011), IPA (1970-November 2011), Google, and Google Scholar that combined the search terms boceprevir, telaprevir, pharmacokinetics, drug interaction, and drug metabolism was performed. Manual reference searches of chosen articles were completed. Monographs and articles, conference proceedings, and abstracts were evaluated. Boceprevir and telaprevir are both substrates and inhibitors of cytochrome P450 3A4 and telaprevir is a substrate of p-glycoprotein. Levels of boceprevir are decreased in patients taking efavirenz but effects with other antiretrovirals are minimal or unknown. Coadministration with efavirenz may compromise telaprevir levels and should be avoided. Telaprevir may increase levels of cyclosporine, tacrolimus, atorvastatin, and amlodipine, which may expose patients to increased adverse effects. Conclusions. Significant drug-drug interactions occur with both boceprevir and telaprevir. Until studies are reported and experience is gained with these agents, clinicians will need to be careful when administering in high-risk populations and those receiving chronic therapy with interacting agents. Studies are urgently needed in HIV patients taking antiretrovirals and patients taking chronic immunosuppression as these populations are at increased risk of experiencing clinically significant interactions.

Objective: To review the efficacy and safety of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in gastroesophageal varices (GEVs). Data Sources: MEDLINE (1946 to September 2014), EMBASE (1974 to September 2014), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to September 2014), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1991 to September 2014), Google, and Google Scholar were searched using the following terms: esophageal varices, gastroesophageal varices, variceal hemorrhage, variceal bleeding, banding ligation, endoscopic variceal ligation, sclerotherapy, proton pump inhibitor, PPI, omeprazole, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, dexlansoprazole, rabeprazole, and esomeprazole. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Published and unpublished studies evaluating the clinical outcomes of PPI use for GEVs were included regardless of study design. Non-English and nonhuman studies were excluded. Data Synthesis: Of 1156 studies, 20 were included after assessment. There was wide methodological heterogeneity and moderately high risk of bias among studies. Level I evidence suggests that PPIs reduce esophageal ulcer size post–elective esophageal ligation; the clinical importance of such findings is not known given the self-limiting nature of esophageal ulcer. Available evidence does not support a role of PPIs for long-term prophylaxis of portal hypertension–related bleeding and high-dose infusion for acute management of GEV hemorrhage. Retrospective data demonstrate a potential increase in the incidence of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in patients with cirrhosis receiving PPIs. Conclusions: The best available evidence supports the use of short-course (10 days) PPI post–endoscopic variceal ligation to reduce ulcer size if ulcer healing is a concern. Practices such as high-dose infusion and prolonged use should be discouraged until evidence of benefit becomes available.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize and evaluate the published literature pertaining to boceprevir and telaprevir, and to provide clinicians with suggestions for use in patients with chronic hepatitis C infection.METHODS: A standardized search strategy was performed using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and International Pharmaceuticals Abstracts databases using the search terms “boceprevir”, “telaprevir”, “boceprevir and hepatitis C” and “telaprevir and hepatitis C”. A manual search of references was performed to identify articles missed by the electronic search. Studies were included in the review if they assessed either boceprevir or telaprevir in comparison with standard of care in chronic hepatitis C patients.RESULTS: The studies identified assessed boceprevir and telaprevir in genotype-1 hepatitis C patients. In both treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients, sustained virological response rates were achieved more often with boceprevir or telaprevir in combination with pegylated interferon and ribavirin compared with pegylated interferon and ribavirin alone. Both medications were well tolerated, with anemia presenting as the most treatment-limiting adverse effect.CONCLUSIONS: Boceprevir and telaprevir will revolutionize the management of hepatitis C genotype 1 patients and will most likely decrease the burden of end-stage disease worldwide. However, current clinical limitations include establishing appropriate and cost-effective treatment durations, and use in special populations such as transplant patients and patients coinfected with HIV. Future research will need to clarify these clinical obstacles to clearly define the role of these agents in hepatitis C management.

Interprofessional education (IPE) is an emerging concept in the Middle East with a number of health professional degree programs continually striving to meet international accreditation requirements to enhance the quality of education and ensure high standards are maintained. Using the College of Pharmacy at Qatar University (CPH QU) as a model, this article describes the IPE initiatives coordinated through the College’s IPE Committee, with representation from fourteen programs at four Healthcare institutions: Qatar University; Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar; the University of Calgary in Qatar; and the College of North Atlantic in Qatar. These activities are based on the model proposed by the University of British Columbia across the different pharmacy professional years. Learning objectives for these initiatives were selected from the IPE shared competency domains and competency statements developed for Qatar context. A meeting with six faculty members, who have been instrumental to designing and executing the IPE activities in the previous 2 years, was convened. Faculty members reflected on IPE activities and collaborations with other participating programs. A structured SWOC (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Challenges) framework was used to guide discussion. The discussion was recorded and notes were taken during the meeting. Raised points were categorized into each SWOC category for the final analysis. Implementation of IPE program is a major undertaking with a number of challenges that require invested time to overcome. This article highlights the importance of incorporating IPE into healthcare curricula to graduate students ready for collaborative practice in the workforce. Learning objectives for IPE initiatives need to be based on shared competency domains. When developing and implementing an IPE program it is necessary to align activities under a strong theoretical framework. This should be done under the leadership of an IPE steering group or committee to oversee the integration of IPE into the healthcare curriculum. The article presents many lessons learned through IPE implementation that are relevant to other academic institutions keen to incorporate IPE into their programs and also provides a successful model for integrating IPE into healthcare curricula.