The Canadian Pharmacists Association (CPhA), previously known as the Canadian Pharmaceutical Association, was founded in 1907 in Toronto, Ontario. CPhA is the national voice of Pharmacists in Canada, representing pharmacists practising in various fields of pharmacy in community, hospital, academia, government and corporate settings, plus pharmacy students. In 2014, CPhA adopted a new governance and membership model, most provincial pharmacy advocacy associations (PPAs) and select national pharmacist associations (NPAs) have become Organizational Members of CPhA. Their individual pharmacist and pharmacy student members are now CPhA Associates. The CPhA Board of Directors is made up of representatives appointed by each Organizational Member. The Board of Directors is responsible for setting the broad direction of the association.In 1923, CPhA became the publisher of the Canadian Pharmacists Journal, now Canada's oldest continuously published periodical. CPhA produces evidence-based drug and therapeutic resources for health care professionals in Canada. CPhA is also a leading provider of continuing professional development aimed at helping Canadian pharmacists practice to their full potential.CPhA is funded in part by sponsorships from pharmaceutical companies including Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and Teva Pharmaceuticals.
Background: The LuBAIR™ Paradigm is a novel approach to ascribe meaning to behavioral expressions in advanced neurocognitive disorders when the reliability of a clinical assessment is limited. The meaning ascribed to each behavioral category was used to identify those who are likely to respond to the use of atypical antipsychotics in their management. De-prescribing was attempted on patients who qualified to enter this retrospective study. De-prescribing was defined as successful if individuals were completely withdrawn from AAP and remained off them for 60 days without the re-emergence of behaviors. Methods: The LuBAIR™ Inventory was filled on two occasions. The data collected on the second occasion, in the successful and failed de-prescribed groups, were compared in this retrospective study. MANOVA, Chi-Square paired t-test statistical analyses were used to detect the differences in the behavioral categories between the two cohorts. Cohen d was used to measure effect size. Results: Patients who did not have Mis-Identification and Goal-Directed Expressions were more likely to successfully de-prescribe: X2 (1, N = 40) = 29.119 p < 0.0001 and X2 (1, N = 40) = 32.374, p < 0.0001, respectively. Alternatively, the same behavioral categories were more likely to be present in patients who failed de-prescribing: MANOVA and paired t -test ( p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Atypical antipsychotics, in their role as an antipsychotic and mood stabilizer, may be used to manage Mis-Identification and Goal-Directed Expressions, respectively.
BACKGROUNDSedative use in older adults increases the risk of falls, fractures, and hospitalizations. The D-PRESCRIBE (Developing Pharmacist-Led Research to Educate and Sensitize Community Residents to the Inappropriate Prescriptions Burden in the Elderly), pragmatic randomized clinical trial demonstrated that community-based, pharmacist-led education delivered simultaneously to older adults and their primary care providers reduce the use of sedatives by 43% over 6 months. However, the associated health benefits and cost savings have yet to be described. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the D-PRESCRIBE intervention compared to usual care for reducing the use of potentially inappropriate sedatives among older adults.METHODSA cost-utility analysis from the public health care perspective of Canada estimated the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with the D-PRESCRIBE intervention compared to usual care over a 1-year time horizon. Transition probabilities, intervention effectiveness, utility, and costs were derived from the literature. Probabilistic analyses were performed using a decision tree and Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.RESULTSCompared to usual care, pharmacist-led deprescribing is less costly (-$1392.05 CAD) and more effective (0.0769 QALYs). Using common willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of $50 000 and $100 000, D-PRESCRIBE was the optimal strategy. Scenario analysis indicated the cost-effectiveness of D-PRESCRIBE is sensitive to the rate of deprescribing.CONCLUSIONSCommunity pharmacist-led deprescribing of sedatives is cost-effective, leading to greater quality-of-life and harm reduction among older adults. As the pharmacist's scope of practice expands, consideration should be given to interprofessional models of remuneration for quality prescribing and deprescribing services.
Canada’s universal public health care system provides physician, diagnostic, and hospital services at no cost to all Canadians, accounting for approximately 70% of the 264 billion CAD spent in health expenditure yearly. Pharmacy-related services, including prescription drugs, however, are not universally publicly insured. Although this system underpins the Canadian identity, primary health care reform has long been desired by Canadians wanting better access to high quality, effective, patient-centred, and safe primary care services. A nationally coordinated approach to remodel the primary health care system was incited at the turn of the 21st century yet, twenty years later, evidence of widespread meaningful improvement remains underwhelming. As a provincial/territorial responsibility, the organization and provision of primary care remains discordant across the country. Canadian pharmacists are, now more than ever, poised and primed to provide care integrated with the rest of the primary health care system. However, the self-regulation of the profession of pharmacy is also a provincial/territorial mandate, making progress toward integration of pharmacists into the primary care system incongruent across jurisdictions. Among 11,000 pharmacies, Canada’s 28,000 community pharmacists possess varying authority to prescribe, administer, and monitor drug therapies as an extension to their traditional dispensing role. Expanded professional services offered at most community pharmacies include medication reviews, minor/common ailment management, pharmacist prescribing for existing prescriptions, smoking cessation counselling, and administration of injectable drugs and vaccinations. Barriers to widely offering these services include uncertainties around remuneration, perceived skepticism from other providers about pharmacists’ skills, and slow digital modernization including limited access by pharmacists to patient health records held by other professionals. Each province/territory enables pharmacists to offer these services under specific legislation, practice standards, and remuneration models unique to their jurisdiction. There is also a small, but growing, number of pharmacists across the country working within interdisciplinary primary care teams. To achieve meaningful, consistent, and seamless integration into the interdisciplinary model of Canadian primary health care reform, pharmacy advocacy groups across the country must coordinate and collaborate on a harmonized vision for innovation in primary care integration, and move toward implementing that vision with ongoing collaboration on primary health care initiatives, strategic plans, and policies. Canadians deserve to receive timely, equitable, and safe interdisciplinary care within a coordinated primary health care system, including from their pharmacy team.
