Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background and Aim Management of genotype 4 hepatitis C virus (HCV) has shifted to interferon‐free regimens with a high sustained virological response (SVR‐12), especially with NS5B/NS5A inhibitor combinations such as sofosbuvir and ledipasvir (Sof‐Led). The guidelines have recommended the combination of sofosbuvir and another NS5A inhibitor, daclatasvir, to manage HCV genotypes 1–3. However, its use was extended to genotype 4 HCV based on extrapolating evidence. Our aim is to assess the efficacy of generic sofosbuvir + branded daclatasvir (Sof‐Dac) compared to the Sof‐Led combination in treating genotype 4 HCV. Methods This study is an open‐label, 2‐period, noninferiority study that compared patients receiving a combination of generic sofosbuvir 400 mg and daclatasvir 60 mg orally daily (Group 2) prospectively to a historical control (Group 1) that included patients who received a combination of sofosbuvir/ledipasvir 400/90 mg orally daily. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients who achieved SVR‐12. Results The study included 111 patients in the (Sof‐Led) Group 1 and 109 patients (Sof‐Dac) Group 2. For the primary outcome, SVR‐12 was achieved in 106 (95.5%) of the patients in Group 1 versus 108 (99.1%) in Group 2 (p = 0.2). In addition, all patients who achieved SVR‐12 also achieved SVR‐24. Conclusion Generic sofosbuvir combined with branded daclatasvir was safe and effective for treating genotype 4 HCV compared to Sof‐Led. This combination may significantly reduce the cost burden, enabling a larger pool of treated patients. Office of research affairs at KFSHRC RAC# 2171 036.

تهدف الدراسة إلى وصف التدخلات الإكلينيكية للصيادلة الموثقة, و استكشاف المعوقات و الميسرات لتوثيق هذه التدخلات. تم إجراء هذه الدراسة في مستشفى الملك فيصل التخصصي و مركز الأبحاث. استعرضنا بشكل استعادي التدخلات الإكلينيكية للصيادلة من يونيو 2007م إلى يونيو 2010م. تم استخراج هذه البيانات من استمارات إلكترونية للمراقبة العلاجية في المستشفى. كما استخدمنا الاستبيان عبر الإنترنت لقياس معوقات و ميسرات التوثيق من وجهة نظر الصيادلة في مستشفى الملك فيصل التخصصي. تم إدخال و تحليل البيانات في برنامج حاسوبي خاص (مايكروسوفت إكسل 2007). العدد الأجمال للتدخلات الموثقة 9906. و قد قبلت غالبية التدخلات من قبل الأطباء (94 %). و كان معظم هذه التدخلات ذات أهمية إكلينيكية متوسطة (82 %). أجاب على الاستبيان 9 صيادلة من أصل 18 (معدل الاستجابة 50 %. العثور على الوقت لتوثيق التدخلات كان أكثر المعوقات شيوعا، و تحسين التوثيق الإلكتروني كان أكثر المسيرات شيوعا. تخلص هذه الدراسة أن الصيادلة يقومون بعدد كبير من التدخلات الإكلينيكية التي من المتوقع أن تحسن نتائج المرضى، و يمكن استخدام عدة استراتيجيات لتحسين عملية التوثيق لتدخلات الصيادلة الإكلينيكيين. The purpose of this study was to describe documented clinical pharmacists’ interventions and explore barriers, plus facilitators for documenting such interventions. The study was conducted at King Faisal Specialist Hospital. Clinical pharmacists’ interventions performed during the period between June 2007 and June 2010 from the hospital’s electronic documentation system was extracted. Information recoded in the system is the following: (i) cause of intervention, (ii) types of intervention, (iii) clinical significance of the intervention, (iv) intervention acceptance by physicians and (v) intervention expected outcomes. To understand documentation barriers and facilitators, an online questionnaire was used. Data entered and analyzed in Microsoft Excel 2007. Descriptive statistics was performed. The total number of interventions documented was 9906 interventions. The majority of interventions were accepted by physicians (94%). Most of these interventions were with moderate clinical significance (82%). Nine pharmacists out of 18 responded to our questionnaire (response rate 50%). Finding time to document interventions was the most common barrier and improving the electronic documentation system was the most common facilitator. Pharmacists make significant number of clinical interventions, which are expected to improve patients’ outcomes. Pharmacists acknowledge that they do not document all their clinical interventions; several strategies can be employed to improve the documentation process.