Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) were implemented in community pharmacies over 40 years ago. However, unlike CDSS studies in other health settings, few studies have been undertaken to evaluate and improve their use in community pharmacies, where billions of prescriptions are filled every year. The aim of this scoping review is to summarize what research has been done surrounding CDSS in community pharmacies and call for rigorous research in this area. Six databases were searched using a combination of controlled vocabulary and keywords relating to community pharmacy and CDSS. After deduplicating the initial search results, 2 independent reviewers conducted title/abstract screening and full-text review. Then, the selected studies were synthesized in terms of investigational/clinical focuses. The selected 21 studies investigated the perception of and response to CDSS alerts (n = 7), the impact of CDSS alerts (n = 7), and drug–drug interaction (DDI) alerts (n = 8). Three causes of the failures to prevent DDIs of clinical importance have been noted: the perception of and response to a high volume of DDI alerts, a suboptimal performance of CDSS, and a dearth of sociotechnical considerations for managing workload and workflow. Additionally, 7 studies emphasized the importance of utilizing CDSS for a specific clinical focus, ie, antibiotics, diabetes, opioids, and vaccinations. Despite the range of topics dealt in the last 30 years, this scoping review confirms that research on CDSS in community pharmacies is limited and disjointed, lacking a comprehensive approach to highlight areas for improvement and ways to optimize CDSS utilization.

Background: Clinical and Translational Research (CTR) requires a team-based approach, with successful teams engaging in skilled management and use of information. Yet we know little about the ways that Translational Teams (TTs) engage with information across the lifecycle of CTR projects. This qualitative study explored the challenges that information management imposes on the conduct of team-based CTR.Methods: We conducted interviews with ten members of TTs at University of Wisconsin. Interviews were transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted.Results: TTs' piecemeal and reactive approaches to information management created conflict within the team and slowed scientific progress. The lack of cohesive information management strategies made it more difficult for teams to develop strong team processes like communication, scientific coordination, and project management. While TTs' research was hindered by the institutional challenges of interdisciplinary team information sharing, TTs who had developed shared approaches to information management that foregrounded transparency, accountability, and trust, described substantial benefits to their teamwork.Conclusion: We propose a new model for the Science of Team Science field - a Translational Team Science Hierarchy of Needs - that suggests interventions should be targeted at the appropriate stage of team development in order to maximize a team's scientific potential.

Older adults (≥65 years) are the largest consumers of over-the-counter (OTC) medications and exceptionally vulnerable to the risks of these medications, including adverse drug events (ADEs). However, little is known about how older adults select and use OTCs. This is the first multisite study designed to prospectively quantify the type and intended use of OTCs selected by older adults in community pharmacies where products are purchased. Older adults (n = 144) were recruited from 10 community pharmacies from a Midwestern health system. Participants were given hypothetical symptoms and asked to select one or more OTCs for self-treatment. They were asked to report how they would use the products at symptom onset and when symptoms persisted or worsened. They also reported their current medication list and health conditions. Participants’ OTC selections were evaluated for 4 types of misuse: drug-age, drug-drug, drug-disease, and drug-label. Of the 144 participants, 114 (79%) demonstrated at least one type of misuse when describing how they would use their OTC selections at symptom onset. Drug-drug and drug-label misuse had the highest prevalence. Overall, 26 (18%) and 28 (19%) participants showed only drug-drug or drug-label misuse, respectively. Notably, 55 (38%) of participants demonstrated misuse in 2 or more misuse categories. Misuse potential was exacerbated when participants described treating persistent or worsening symptoms. The results highlight the high prevalence and complexity of OTC misuse in older adults and the need for additional work to improve OTC safety.

Introduction:To conduct high-quality, rigorous research, and advance scientific knowledge, Translational Teams (TTs) engage in information behaviors, including seeking, using, creating, sharing, storing, and retrieving information, in ways specific to the translational context. Currently, little is known about TTs' approach to information management. This qualitative pilot study explored how TTs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison interact with information, as well as the scientific and organizational impact of their interactions.Methods:We conducted interviews with ten members of UW TTs. Interviews were transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted.Results:Four themes emerged: (1) TT members did not recognize the centrality of information or information behaviors to their scientific work; (2) TT members engaged in similar information behaviors and used similar tools across disciplines and topics; (3) TT members did not receive support or guidance from their institution in managing information; and (4) Individualized choices of TT members conflicted at the team level, causing confusion and increasing the potential for data and information loss. Acting as freelance information management agents, TT members made individualized decisions about what tools to use and how to use them, often in a piecemeal manner and without communicating these decisions to other team members.Conclusion:Research institutions should both encourage teams to discuss their information management approaches at the beginning of a project and provide leaders with training on how to have these conversations and what topics should be included. Additionally, institutions can provide researchers with guidelines for using software platforms to help mitigate information management challenges.

Introduction: Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD), including injectable naltrexone, are a key component in the treatment of opioid use disorder (OUD). These medications are especially important for individuals transitioning out of correctional facilities and back into their communities. Unfortunately, few formerly incarcerated individuals have access to MOUD upon reentry, incurring a 40-fold greater likelihood of overdose following release compared to the general population. In Wisconsin, community pharmacists have the authority to administer naltrexone injections. However, they have not been explored as a resource for improving access to this medication for this patient population. Objective: As a first step, the goal of this study was to understand the barriers and facilitators impacting the use of community pharmacist-provided injectable naltrexone by formerly incarcerated individuals during community reentry period. Materials and methods: The researcher conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 individuals representing five stakeholder groups, including four MOUD prescribers, three community pharmacists, four correctional staff, four community organization or non-profit staff, and three individuals or family members/caregivers of individuals with a history of OUD and incarceration. Deductive and inductive content analysis were used to identify barrier and facilitator categories across the five levels of the Socioecological Model. Results: Overall, participants discussed factors at every level, and many barriers and facilitators confirmed findings from existing literature focused on MOUD access for formerly incarcerated individuals. Participants also identified factors more specific to community pharmacies, including 1) lack of interagency collaboration between pharmacists, prescribers, and correctional facilities and 2) lack of awareness of community pharmacistprovided injectable naltrexone services. Conclusions: Future research should explore interventions to address the barriers identified in this study and improve connections between community pharmacists and formerly incarcerated individuals. This work can help ensure that these individuals are given the chance to successfully reintegrate into their communities.