OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a pharmaceutical intervention on treatment optimization in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS: Before-after intervention study. SITE: Health centers of the Primary Care Department of Camp de Tarragona.
METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus and under treatment with antidiabetic drugs.
METHODS: Review of pharmacological treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus and issuance of proposals for its adequacy.
METHODS: Demographic and clinical variables were collected to assess the adequacy of antidiabetic treatment. A consensus meeting was arranged with the patients\' primary care physician to evaluate the proposals for improvement. The implementation of the proposals and the variation in postintervention glycemic control were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 907 patients (59% men) were included. A total of 782 proposals for intervention were made in 65.8% of the patients reviewed. Of the proposals, 43.5% corresponded to drug discontinuation, 16% to intensification of dosing and 12.6% to exchange for a therapeutic equivalent. Of the consensual proposals, 54.7% were implemented. HbA1c was reduced by 0.2% after the intervention (7.4 vs 7.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: Review of the pharmacological treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus by a pharmacist or pharmacologist facilitates its optimization.

To analyze the role played by the clinical pharmacist and its impact in antibiotic stewardship facing suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics.
We performed 2 different independent bibliographic searches. A total of 35 articles were found, and the final number included in the study was 12. We analyzed the articles and collected variables of efficacy, safety, and applicability of evaluation tools applied to patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactams. Also, the variation in the consumption and prescription profile of alternative antibiotics was analyzed.
The selected studies analyzed questionnaires, allergy delabeling, intradermal tests, and oral challenge tests performed by pharmacists. Significant differences in the efficacy endpoint were found in 4 studies in favor of pharmaceutical intervention. In the study of Kwiatkowski et al., cefazolin use increased in surgical patients after pharmacist intervention (65% vs 28%; P < .01). In a quasi-experimental study, the mean defined daily dose of aztreonam and the mean days of therapy per 1000 patients/day decreased (21.23 vs 9.05, P <.01) and (8.79-4.24, P = .016), pre- and post-intervention, respectively, increasing antibiotic de-escalations (P = < .01). In another quasi-experimental study, the prescription of restricted use antibiotics decreased (42.5% vs 17.9%, P < .01)and the use of pre-surgical prophylactic antibiotics alternative to cefazolin (81.9% vs 55.9%, P < .01)in another study. Other study showed that the mean time per interview was 5.2 min per patient. No adverse events were reported in any study.
The pharmacist intervention in the evaluation of the patient with suspected allergy to beta-lactams is effective, safe, and feasible to implement on daily clinical practice. The standardization of protocols to clarify the history of allergies and development of evaluation tools represent simple screenings to perform delabeling or refer to the Immunoallergology service, improving penicilins use and reducing the need for second-line antibiotics. More studies are needed to standardize the desensitization tests made by pharmacists. However, despite these results, the involvement and leadership of the pharmacist in this area is limited and constitutes a future challenge for the profession.

To analyze the role played by the clinical pharmacist and its impact in antibiotic stewardship facing suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics.
We performed two different independent bibliographic searches. A total of 35 articles were found, and the final number included in the study was 12. We analysed the articles and collected variables of efficacy, safety and applicability of evaluation tools applied to patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactams. Also, the variation in the consumption and prescription profile of alternative antibiotics was analyzed.
The selected studies analysed questionnaires, allergy delabeling, intradermal tests and oral challenge tests performed by pharmacists. Significant differences in the efficacy endpoint were found in 4 studies in favour of pharmaceutical intervention. In the study of Kwiatkowski et al, cefazolin use increased in surgical patients after pharmacist intervention (65 vs. 28%; p < 0.01). In a quasi-experimental study, the mean defined daily dose of aztreonam and the mean days of therapy per 1000 patients/day decreased (21.23 vs 9.05, p <0.01) and (8.79-4.24, p = 0.016), pre and post-intervention, respectively, increasing antibiotic de-escalations (p ≤ 0.01). In another quasi-experimental study, the prescription of restricted-use antibiotics decreased (42.5% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.01) and the use of pre-surgical prophylactic antibiotics alternative to cefazolin (81.9% vs 55.9%, p<0.01) in another study. Other study showed that the mean time per interview was 5.2 minutes per patient. No adverse events were reported in any study.
The pharmacist intervention in the evaluation of the patient with suspected allergy to beta-lactams is effective, safe and feasible to implement on daily clinical practice. The standardization of protocols to clarify the history of allergies and development of evaluation tools represent simple screenings to perform delabelling or refer to the Immunoallergology service, improving penicilins use and reducing the need for second line antibiotics. More studies are needed to standardize the desensitization tests made by pharmacists. However, despite these results, the involvement and leadership of the pharmacist in this area is limited and constitutes a future challenge for the profession.

Evaluate the improvement in therapeutic adherence of an intervention based on telephone monitoring by the primary care pharmacist.
Randomized open controlled trial.
This study was carried out in 2021 by a multidisciplinary team working with health professionals of thirteen health centers belonging to four health districts in Community of Madrid, Spain.
These were patients (60-74 years) with polipharmacy classified as non-adherent according to the Morisky-Green test. Two hundred and twenty-four patients were originally enrolled, 87 of them were non-adherents. Of these, 15 were lost and 72 were finally randomized. Seventy-one patients completed the study (33 intervention group and 38 control group).
Patients randomized to the intervention arm were included in a follow-up telephone program consisting of an interview at months 1, 2, and 3 to improve adherence. The Morisky-Green test was repeated at month 4 to assess improvement. In the control group this test was only performed at month 4.
Adherence measured by Morisky-Green at baseline and at 4th month.
The 72.7% of patients in the intervention group became adherent while only 34.2% did in the control arm, being the difference 38.5% (95% CI: 17.1-59.9), statistically significant (P=.001).
After a follow-up educational-behavioral telephone intervention in non-adherent patients by the primary care pharmacist, therapeutic adherence was improved statistically significantly in the intervention group compared with the control group.

To assess the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led systematic review of medications on: potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), health outcomes and costs.
Prospective, open, controlled and cluster-randomized clinical trial.
Six primary care clinics from Balearic Islands.
Forty-two clusters (21 per group), and 549 patients aged ≥65 years and ≥5 chronic medications were included; of which 277 were allocated to Intervention Group (IG) and 272 to Control Group (CG). Patients were excluded if they were: institutionalized, temporarily displaced, routinely monitored under private healthcare, or home care.
PIM detection by the pharmacist using a combination of explicit and implicit methods; and communication of the most appropriate therapeutic strategies to the physician.
Proportion of patients with PIM and mean number of PIM/patient (main outcomes); and morbidity, mortality, and costs (secondary outcomes) were assessed.
Following an intention-to-treat approach, quantitative and qualitative outcomes variables were compared by T-Student and Chi-square tests, respectively. Results were providing as difference in proportions for qualitative outcomes and difference in means for quantitative outcomes with respective 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
After intervention, proportion of patients with PIM decreased by 13.7% (95% CI: 9.3; 18.2) more in IG than CG. Mean number of PIM/patient and mean cost of PIM/patient decreased by 0.43 (95% CI: 0.32; 0.54) and 72.11€ (95% CI: 26.15; 118.06) more in IG than CG, respectively. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in morbidity, mortality or costs of healthcare resources.
PIM detection and recommendations provided by pharmacist could contribute to reduce significantly PIM and drug expenditure; but without reaching statistically significant differences in morbidity, mortality, and healthcare resources costs.