OBJECTIVE:To provide reference for improving pharmaceutical care in the hospital. METHODS:A total of 712 clinical pharmacists were selected from 38 third grade class A hospitals in 17 provinces and cities by convenient sampling to investi-gate the ability of pharmacectical care and influantial factors. Single and multiple factor Logistic regression analysis were conducted for the results. RESULTS:The single factor analysis showed that there was significant difference in the communication between clinical pharmacists and patients or medical staffs,the listening attitude of the patients,attitude towards job prospects,understand-ing about the connotation of clinical pharmacy,the timeliness of drug supply,smoothness degree of channel,the timeliness of coordi-nation,smooth development of pharmaceutical care(P<0.05). The multiple factor analysis showed that due to good communication with the doctor [OR=1.819,95%CI(1.469,2.253)],pharmacists could understand definition and connotation of pharmaceutical care [OR=2.263,95%CI(1.722,2.973)],and the male pharmacists [OR=0.558,95%CI(0.382,0.813)] with positive attitude to the pharmacists [OR=1.506,95%CI(1.309,1.733)] believed to provide good pharmaceutical care. CONCLUSIONS:This investigation can reflect the present situation of hospital pharmaceutical service in China to a certain extent. It is suggested to improve pharmaceuti-cal care ability of pharmacists through strengthening resource disposition and the cooperation between physicians and pharmacist.

OBJECTIVE:To investigate the regularity and characteristics of adverse drug reaction (ADR) in our hospital,to reduce the incidence of ADR,and to provide reference for clinical rational drug use. METHODS:1 731 ADR cases reported by our hospital during Jan. 2002 to Jul. 2015 to national ADR monitoring center through the network system were selected and analyzed statistically in respects of gender,age,related drugs,route of administration,causal relationship evaluation,reporting personnel status,ADR results and drug dosage form organs or systems involved in ADR and manifestation. RESULTS:There were a total of 1 731 ADR patients,among which 640 cases were male,and 1 091 cases were female;patients aged 41-60,≥61 were 676,568 cases;there were 86 cases of severe ADR and 1 645 cases of general ADR,249 cases of new ADR,include 19 cases of severe ADR;causal relationship evaluation of ADR was“impossible”(572 cases) and“very likely”(859 cases) as the vast majority of staff reporting;the most of reporters were doctors (1 290 cases,74.52%),followed by pharmacists (323 cases, 18.66%) and nurses (118 cases, 6.82%);ADR of most patients were improved and recovered. There were 16 routes of administration in ADR cases,among which intravenous infusion and oral administration were the main route of administration, accounting for 92.95%;ADR reports involved 32 kinds of dosage form,which mainly were injection,tablets and capsules, accounting for 86.76%. CONCLUSIONS:Great importance should be attached to ADR monitoring and reporting. We also should reduce the use of intravenous drugs,pay attention to the safety of drug use in elderly patients,promote clinical rational drug use, and ensure the safety of patients.

Objective: To assess the quality for meta-analysis on prevention and treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in China.
Methods: We systemically searched 4 Chinese databases of VIP, CNKI, CBM and Wan Fang for their meta-analysis on CAD prevention and treatment from 1987-01 to 2013-10. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2 researchers independently screened and cross-checked all the literatures. The qualities of methodology and report were evaluated by R-AMSTAR and PRISMA scales.
Results: A total of 201 literatures were enrolled for our study. The average score of methodology quality was (24.65±3.97), no literature met all required items, and the major problems were as lack of“a priori design”, insufifcient and bias of data selection combining inappropriate data synthesis. The average score of report quality was (17.20 ± 2.90), no literature met all 27 required items, and the major problems were as incomplete report of abstract, objective, protocol and registration, incomplete data collection/analysis, using and publishing bias information, incomplete quality assessment.
Conclusion: Both of methodology and report of meta-analysis for CAD prevention and treatment have quality problems at different levels, further improvement should be expected.