Objective: This study aimed to enhance Drug Information Practice Experiences (DIPE) in Japan by comparing DIPEs at Tohoku University Hospital (TUH) with Nova Southeastern University (NSU) in the United States, and propose an advanced model of drug information (DI) education in Japan.
Methods: We performed the following: (i) comparison of both DIPEs based on Model Core Curriculum (MCC) content; (ii) identification of practices which were not part of NSU or TUH DIPE; (iii) comparison of students’ DIPE performance based on MCC: (A) students’ performance without the preceptors and their post-performance approval, (A’) students’ performance without the preceptors and their pre-performance approval, and (B) students’ performance under direct preceptor supervision; (iv) highlighting differences between TUH and NSU DIPEs; and (v) proposing an advanced model of DI education in Japan.
Results: (i) The NSU DIPE is similar to the MCC.  An example difference between NSU and TUH learning strategies was that NSU students responded to the inquiries made by the phone whereas TUH students receive assignments and explanation from preceptors.  (ii) DIPE at NSU utilized oral presentations and student interaction in many forms (e.g. journal club, reflection regarding learned topics).  On the other hand, DIPE at TUH helped students learn about Medical Representative jobs and educated them in tablet/capsule identification practices.  (iii) In contrast, the TUH curriculum limits students’ performance to “experience via dissemination with health professional needs and patients’ needs”.  (iv) These clarified points are considered to be differences between DIPE at TUH and NSU.  (v) Following analysis of these points, an advanced model of DI education based on responses to DI phone inquiries and oral presentations including a journal club was proposed.
Conclusions: This study will contribute to improving DI education in Japan.

Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent lumbar fusion with a postoperative drain between 2017 and 2020 were included and grouped based on hospital readmission status, last 8-hour drain output (<40 mL cutoff), or drain duration (2 days cutoff). Total output of all drains, total output of the primary drain, drain duration in days, drain output per day, last 8-hour output, penultimate 8-hour output, and last 8-hour delta (last 8-hour output subtracted by penultimate 8-hour output) were collected. Continuous and categorical data were compared between groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed to determine whether drain variables can predict hospital readmission, postoperative blood transfusions, and postoperative anemia. Alpha was 0.05. Results: Our cohort consisted of 1,166 patients with 111 (9.5%) hospital readmissions. Results of regression analysis did not identify any of the drain variables as independent predictors of hospital readmission, postoperative blood transfusion, or postoperative anemia. ROC analysis demonstrated the drain variables to be poor predictors of hospital readmission, with the highest area under curve of 0.524 (drain duration), corresponding to a sensitivity of 61.3% and specificity of 49.9%. Conclusions Drain output or duration did not affect readmission rates following lumbar spine surgery.