Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33449247›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2021

Community pharmacist's professional adaptation amid Covid-19 emergency: a national survey on Italian pharmacists.

Corrado Giua, Giovanni Paoletti, Luigi Minerba, Giacomo Malipiero, Giulio Melone, Enrico Heffler, Assunta Pistone, Enrico Keber, SIFAC Group of Clinical Community Pharmacists (SGCP)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Corrado Giua *Società Italiana Farmacia Clinica (SIFAC), Cagliari, Italy.
Giovanni Paoletti *Personalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
Luigi MinerbaDepartment of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy.
Giacomo MalipieroPersonalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
Giulio MelonePersonalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy.
Enrico HefflerPersonalized Medicine, Asthma and Allergy, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Via Alessandro Manzoni 56, 20089, Rozzano, MI, Italy. heffler.enrico@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0492-5663
Assunta PistoneSocietà Italiana Farmacia Clinica (SIFAC), Cagliari, Italy.
Enrico KeberSocietà Italiana Farmacia Clinica (SIFAC), Cagliari, Italy.
SIFAC Group of Clinical Community Pharmacists (SGCP)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Italy has been the first non-Asian country affected by Coronavirus Disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Community pharmacies are essential services authorized to continue their activity during the emergency. To date, a clear image is lacking of the critical issues Italian community pharmacists had to face and of how they responded in their daily work.. Objective To describe procedures and critical logistical-organizational issues encountered by Italian community pharmacists and to collect the main requests reported by patients to pharmacists. Setting A national survey on Italian community pharmacists. Method A cross-sectional survey using a reasoned questionnaire was sent during the pandemic peak to Italian pharmacies, divided in two groups according to the incidence of COVID-19: "Red Zones" and "non-Red Zones". Main outcome measure Exploring the most frequently adopted measures by the pharmacists. Results 169 community Pharmacists answered the questionnaire. The most frequently adopted measures were the use of gloves, surgical masks and protective barriers at the drug counter. Most implemented services for customers were: booking of prescriptions, delivery of medications and implementation of phone consultations. Overall, the questionnaire highlighted an increase in the number of health-related consultations and requests by customers. In Red Zones, there was a higher use of FFP2 and FFP3 masks by pharmacists, where customers were mainly interested in gaining information about specific classes of medications. Conclusion Community pharmacists adapted to lockdown measures by implementing a number of measures. There was an overall increase in pharmacists' personal protective equipment in Red Zones possibly linked to increased risk perception.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesEmergenciesHumansItalyPersonal Protective EquipmentPharmacistsSurveys and QuestionnairesCOVID-19EducationPharmacyPrevention

Identifiers

PMID33449247
PMCPMC7809641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.