To assess the community pharmacists' knowledge, attitude, perception and current practices towards generic medicines substitution in Saudi Arabia. A cross-sectional study was conducted between February and March 2016 in the Makkah region, Saudi Arabia. A 25-item, structured, validated, pilot-tested and self-completed questionnaire was used to achieve study objectives. A 4-step systematic sampling technique was used to recruit community pharmacists. Data were analysed using SPSS version 20. Of 128 community pharmacists approached, 121 participated in the study (response rate=95%). Majority of the participants (n=108; 89.3%) had graduated from Egypt, were working as staff pharmacists (n=85; 70%) and had BPharm degree (97; 80.2%). Only 26 (22%) of the participants correctly answered all knowledge questions accurately. No statistically significant difference in total knowledge score was observed across different sociodemographic characteristics of participants (all P>0.05).Two-thirds of the respondents (83; 68.2%) supported the use of generic substitution. Medicines cost and patients' request were the most commonly cited reasons for performing generic substitution. Country of graduation (P=0.01) and number of years of practicing in Saudi Arabia (P=0.02) was associated with the pharmacists' support towards generic substitution. The community pharmacists had clear knowledge deficits about generic medicines and their substitution which may partly explain low consumption of generic medicines in Saudi Arabia. Healthcare policy makers need to improve awareness about the safety and efficacy of generic medicines and promote their use in order to cut down cost of medicines and overall healthcare expenditure.

Background: Acetazolamide is a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor that inhibits proximal sodium bicarbonate reabsorption, thus increasing urinary bicarbonate excretion. Despite its widespread distribution in the body and beneficial effects on alkaline diuresis, its efficacy and the optimal dosage and duration of acetazolamide in treating metabolic acidosis remain areas of uncertainty. This review aims to assess the effectiveness of acetazolamide in treating chloride depletion alkalosis, mainly induced by diuretics, through a systematic evaluation of clinical research data. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed and Embase. This review included randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and case reports. Data extraction included dose, route, frequency, indication, duration of therapy, patient demographics, and outcomes. Results: A comprehensive search strategy identified 107 studies, of which 7 met the inclusion criteria after full-text review. The reviewed studies encompassed two randomized clinical trials, one case–control study, and three case reports, collectively involving 111 patients with metabolic alkalosis. The studies revealed varied outcomes regarding the efficacy of acetazolamide in treating metabolic alkalosis induced by diuretics. While some trials demonstrated significant improvements in serum bicarbonate levels and acid–base balance, others found no statistically significant reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation. Case reports highlighted the successful use of acetazolamide in diverse patient populations, including pediatric patients with heart disease and individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Conclusions: Acetazolamide holds promise in addressing chloride depletion alkalosis. However, a targeted clinical trial investigating its effectiveness in diuretic-induced metabolic alkalosis must strengthen the existing knowledge base.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Telemedicine is underutilized in Saudi Arabia, which is a matter of concern, especially since previous literature has showed its equivalence with office visits in providing access to care and convenience for patients while reducing anticoagulation-related bleeding events when appropriate measures are followed. The purpose of this study is to analyze the efficacy of telehealth-based care compared to in-person visit care for warfarin follow-up. The authors conducted a retrospective chart review comparing the mean percentage of time in the therapeutic range (TTR) of international normalized ratio (INR) values among patients prescribed warfarin from July 2019 to November 2020 at King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center – Jeddah Branch whose anticoagulant therapy was managed via telemedicine or through in-person clinic visits. A subcohort analysis of outcomes in the telemedicine and in-person groups was performed using propensity score matching, and descriptive analysis was done for the entire cohort. A total of 350 patient records were included in this retrospective study. Matched analysis for 148 patients using propensity score matching showed that the mean (SD) percentage of TTR was 62.82 (19.46) and 70.61 (19.83) in the telemedicine and in-person groups, respectively (P = 0.017). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of major or minor bleeding events, thromboembolic events, and hospital readmission between the two groups. The study results showed that patients on oral anticoagulation therapy managed through a telemedicine method had a lower overall TTR percentage than a matched group of patients managed through in-person anticoagulant clinic visits, thus demonstrating that using a telemedicine approach alone for warfarin follow-up may not help patients to maintain their INR target level.

Drug classes such as direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are relatively new; therefore, it is imperative to report their adverse effects with transparent information, and the quality of these reports in the medical science needs to be assessed. Aim of this study was to assess the quality of adverse effect reporting of DOACs against warfarin in atrial fibrillation (AF) using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Harms checklist. We searched MEDLINE and Drug@FDA, and identified four Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs from DOACs class and their relevant clinical trials. The data extraction form was designed using the CONSORT Statement of Harms to include 18 items. Data extraction was conducted by the first three authors independently, and any discrepancies were resolved with a discussion later. Descriptive analysis was employed to measure the rate and percentage of completion of all the items in our revised CONSORT Statement of Harms checklist. Data analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20.0 software. All included articles were multicentered. The median number of authors was 14.78, and the median impact factor was 26.48. Eligibility criteria, interventions, outcomes, sequence generation, and baseline data were the most reported items whereas estimating the outcomes and explaining any interim analyses and stopping guidelines were the least reported items. All articles from New England Journal of Medicine had a higher percentage of completion of items on the CONSORT checklist compared to the articles from other journals. The quality of reporting adverse effects for DOACs against warfarin in AF was found to be adequate.