Background: This study aims to identify interventions used to reduce medication regimen complexity and to assess their impact on medication adherence and clinical outcomes. Methods: A literature search was conducted using pre-defined search terms in three scientific databases, including ScienceDirect, ProQuest and MEDLINE. Original research articles published in English between 2009 and 2020 that assessed the impact of medication regimen simplification on medication adherence in patients with long-term medical conditions were eligible for inclusion. Review articles, meta-analysis studies and conference proceedings were excluded. Data charting was done in an iterative process using a study-specific extraction form. Results: Of the 684 studies identified through initial searches, 17 studies were included in the review. Nine studies involved simplification of medication regimen related to HIV, while three studies focused on patients with diabetes with or without coronary artery disease. The remaining five studies included medications used among elderly patients or medications related to hypertension, psychiatric disorders, glaucoma and kidney diseases. Three medication regimen simplification strategies were identified; fixed-dose combination (n = 7), once-daily dosing (n = 4) and the combination of both fixed-dose and once-daily dosing (n = 6). Overall, most of the regimen simplification strategies (14 out of 17) were found to be useful in improving medication adherence. There was no assessment of clinical outcomes in four out of 17 studies. Furthermore, more than half of the studies that assessed clinical outcomes did not show any additional impact on clinical outcomes. Conclusion: The findings suggest that there was an equal utilization of the three main approaches of regimen simplifications; fixed-dose combination, once-daily dosing and a combination of both. Overall, most of the regimen simplification strategies were found to be effective in improving medication adherence. However, the associated improvement in medication adherence did not extend to improvement in the clinical outcomes.

Aims: To conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the effectiveness of general practice‐based pharmacist interventions in reducing the medical risk factors for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events.Methods: A systemic search was undertaken in 8 databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBAS, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL Plus, SCOPUS and Science Citation Index, with no start date up to 27 March 2019. Randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of pharmacist‐led interventions delivered in the general practice in reducing the medical risk factors of cardiovascular events were included in the review. The risk of bias in the studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.Results: A total of 1604 studies were identified, with 21 randomised controlled trials (8933 patients) meeting the inclusion criteria. Fourteen studies were conducted in patients with diabetes, 7 in hypertension, 2 involving dyslipidaemia, and 2 with hypertension and diabetes together. The most frequently used interventions were medication review and medication management. The quality of the included studies was variable. Patients receiving pharmacist‐led interventions were associated with a statistically significant reduction in their systolic blood pressure (−9.33 mmHg [95% Confidence Interval (CI) −13.36 to −5.30]), haemoglobin A1C (−0.76% [95% CI −1.15 to −0.37]) and low‐density lipoprotein–cholesterol (−15.19 mg/dL [95% CI −24.05 to −6.33]). Moreover, practice‐based pharmacists' interventions were also reported to have a positive impact on patient adherence to medications.Conclusion: The findings of this review suggest that pharmacist‐led interventions in general practice can significantly reduce the medical risk factors of cardiovascular disease events. These findings support the involvement of pharmacists as healthcare providers in managing patients with hypertension, diabetes and dyslipidaemia.

Purpose: Cancer patients have faced intersecting crises during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aimed to examine patients’ and caregivers’ experiences of accessing cancer services during the pandemic and its perceived impact on their psychological wellbeing. Patients and Methods: A protocol-led (CRD42020214906) systematic review was conducted by searching six databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE and CINAHL for articles published in English-language between 1/2020 and 12/2020. Data were extracted using a pilot-tested, structured data extraction form. Thematic synthesis of data was undertaken and reported as per the PRISMA guideline. Results: A total of 1110 articles were screened, of which 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies originated from 10 different countries including the US, UK, India and China. Extracted data were categorised into seven themes. Postponement and delays in cancer screening and treatment, drug shortages and inadequate nursing care were commonly experienced by patients. Hospital closures, resource constraints, national lockdowns and patient reluctance to use health services due to infection worries contributed to the delay. Financial and social distress, isolation, and spiritual distress were also commonly reported. Caregivers in addition felt anxious about infecting cancer patients with COVID-19. Conclusion: Patients and caregivers experienced delays in cancer screening, treatment and care during the COVID-19 pandemic and negatively affected their psychological wellbeing. Their views and preferences should be accounted to minimise the impact of the current and any future pandemics and ensure resilient cancer services. Protocol Registration: Published protocol registered with Centre for Review and Dissemination CRD42020214906 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=214906).

Adverse drug events (ADEs) impose a major clinical and cost burden on acute hospital services. It has been reported that medicines reconciliation provided by pharmacists is effective in minimizing the chances of hospital admissions related to adverse drug events. To update the previous assessment of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation by restricting the review to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only. Six major online databases were sifted up to 30 December 2016, without inception date (Embase, Medline Ovid, PubMed, BioMed Central, Web of Science and Scopus) to assess the effect of pharmacist-led interventions on medication discrepancies, preventable adverse drug events, potential adverse drug events and healthcare utilization. The Cochrane tool was applied to evaluate the chances of bias. Meta-analysis was carried out using a random effects model. From 720 articles identified on initial searching, 18 RCTs (6,038 patients) were included. The quality of the included studies was variable. Pharmacists-led interventions led to an important decrease in favour of the intervention group, with a pooled risk ratio of 42% RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.67) P<0.00001 in medication discrepancy. Reductions in healthcare utilization by 22% RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.61 to 1.00) P = 0.05, potential ADEs by10% RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.03) P = 0.65 and preventable ADEs by 27% RR 0.73 (0.22 to 2.40) P = 0.60 were not considerable. Pharmacists-led interventions were effective in reducing medication discrepancies. However, these interventions did not lead to a significant reduction in potential and preventable ADEs and healthcare utilization.