The use of computerized clinical decision support systems may improve the diagnosis and ongoing management of chronic diseases, which requires recurrent visits to multiple health professionals, disease and medication monitoring and modification of patient behavior. The aim of this review was to systematically review randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of computerized clinical decision systems (CCDSS) in the care of people with asthma and COPD. Randomized controlled trials published between 2003 and 2013 were searched using multiple electronic databases Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, IPA, Informit, PsychINFO, Compendex, and Cochrane Clinical Controlled Trials Register databases. To be included, RCTs had to evaluate the role of the CCDSSs for asthma and/or COPD in primary care. Nineteen studies representing 16 RCTs met our inclusion criteria. The majority of the trials were conducted in patients with asthma. Study quality was generally high. Meta-analysis was not conducted because of methodological and clinical heterogeneity. The use of CCDSS improved asthma and COPD care in 14 of the 19 studies reviewed (74%). Nine of the nineteen studies showed statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvement in the primary outcomes measured. The majority of the studies evaluated health care process measures as their primary outcomes (10/19). Evidence supports the effectiveness of CCDSS in the care of people with asthma. However there is very little information of its use in COPD care. Although there is considerable improvement in the health care process measures and clinical outcomes through the use of CCDSSs, its effects on user workload and efficiency, safety, costs of care, provider and patient satisfaction remain understudied.

Stimulated reporting occurs when patients and healthcare professionals are influenced or "stimulated" by media publicity to report specific drug-related adverse reactions, significantly biasing pharmacovigilance analyses. Among countries where the non-benzodiazepine hypnotic drug zolpidem is marketed, the United States experienced a comparable surge of media reporting during 2006-2009 linking the above drug with the development of complex neuropsychiatric sleep-related behaviors. However, the effect of this stimulated reporting in the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System has not been explored. Using disproportionality analyses, reporting odds ratios for zolpidem exposure and the following adverse events; parasomnia, movement-based parasomnia, nonmovement-based parasomnia, amnesia, hallucination, and suicidality were determined and compared to all other medications in the database, followed by specific comparison to the benzodiazepine hypnotic class, year-by-year from 2003 to 2012. Odds ratios were increased significantly during and after the period of media publicity for parasomnias, movement-based parasomnias, amnesias and hallucinations. We also observed that zolpidem adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports have higher odds for parasomnias, movement-based parasomnias, amnesias, hallucinations, and suicidality compared to all other drugs, even before the media publicity cluster. Although our results indicate that zolpidem reports have higher odds for the ADR of interest even before the media publicity cluster, negative media coverage greatly exacerbated the reporting of these adverse reactions. The effect of such reporting must be borne in mind when decisions around drugs which have been the subject of intense media publicity are made by health professionals or regulatory bodies.

The role of community pharmacists in disease state management has been mooted for some years. Despite a number of trials of disease state management services, there is scant literature into the engagement of, and with, pharmacists in such trials. This paper reports pharmacists’ feedback as providers of a Pharmacy Asthma Management Service (PAMS), a trial coordinated across four academic research centres in Australia in 2009. We also propose recommendations for optimal involvement of pharmacists in academic research.

This paper reports a qualitative pilot study exploring primary care health practitioners’ perspectives on the management of insomnia following the extensive media coverage on the adverse effects of zolpidem in 2007–08. General practitioners and community pharmacists were recruited throughout metropolitan Sydney, New South Wales using a convenience sampling and snowballing technique. Demographic information was collected from each participant followed by a semistructured interview. In total 22 participants were interviewed, including eight general practitioners and 14 community pharmacists. Interview transcripts were analysed using ‘framework analysis’. Participants’ responses illuminated some of the key issues facing primary care practitioners in the management of insomnia. Practitioners perceived there to be an overreliance on pharmacotherapy among insomnia patients and inadequate support for directing patients to alternative treatment pathways if they require or prefer non-pharmacological management. Current prescribing trends appear to favour older benzodiazepines in new cases of insomnia whereas some successful sporadic users of zolpidem have continued to use zolpidem after the media coverage in 2007–08. The findings of this pilot study suggest the need to address the limitations in the management of insomnia within the current health care system, to revise and disseminate updated insomnia guidelines and to provide educational opportunities and resources to primary care practitioners concerning management options.

Objective. To develop, implement, and evaluate a process of intergroup peer assessment and feedback using problem-based learning (PBL) tutorials.Methods. A peer-assessment process was used in a PBL...