Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37961071›Full record

ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2023

Assessing oncology providers attitudes and practices toward nonformulary drugs and mapping current obstacles in Saudi Arabia.

Nora Alkhudair, Abdullah A Alhifany, Basha Alsubaie, Leena Alshubaiki, Abdullah M Alrajhi, Mohammed Alnuhait

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Nora AlkhudairClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah A AlhifanyDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.
Basha AlsubaieClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Leena AlshubaikiClinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Abdullah M AlrajhiClinical Pharmacy Department, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammed AlnuhaitDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, College of Pharmacy, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Formulary drug list is a continually updated list of medications routinely stocked by hospitals and other healthcare facilities and deemed effective, safe, and cost saving. Non-formulary drug (NFD) refers to medications not on the formulary, due to cost or lack of clinical data. This study aimed to examine the processing of NFD requests by oncology providers (OPs) in Saudi Arabia. Method: A cross-sectional survey in Saudi oncology centers gathered perspectives of healthcare practitioners, mainly oncology pharmacists and physicians, on NFDs and request processes, aiming to understand variations, reasons for NFDs, and suggestions for an improved, unified NFDs request algorithm. Result: A total of 93 physicians and pharmacists responded, 57 % were pharmacists, 43 % were physicians, and 94.6 % worked in the governmental sector. Around 31.2 % reported that it takes one week to receive a decision on their NFD request, while 28 % reported it takes two weeks to one month. Furthermore, 35.5 % of participants reported that the complete NFD process, from the initial order placement to the receipt of medications, spans a duration of 2-4 months, while 8.6 % noted a longer duration exceeding six months. The participants reported that the most common obstacles while requesting NFD were procurement delays and lengthy processing times. Additionally, 26.9 % agreed that formulary restrictions hindered medical care and 40.3 % reported delays in patient care. While 33.8 % were forced to use fewer effective options, and 22.1 % referred patients to palliative care. Conclusion: The current practice of NFDs has negative consequences on cancer patient outcomes due to delays in patient care or the use of less effective drugs. Thus, we recommend having a national NFD access program.

Indexed as

FormularyHealthcareMedicationsOncologyPharmacistsPhysicians

Identifiers

PMID37961071
PMCPMC10638026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.