Objective: The purpose of the study was to analyze the difference in the importance and performance of the educational content of the community pharmacy practice and find the factors that influence it. Methods: A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire asked about the importance and performance of the pharmacy practice education items to community pharmacy preceptors, current students, and professors. Data were analyzed using Microsoft office 365 Excel and IBM SPSS 21.0. Results: A total of 117 people participated. The averages of importance and performance were 4.34±0.34 and 3.71±0.45, respectively. Except for the computational entry of prescriptions and medication history, the average score for the importance of all educational items was statistically significantly higher than the one for performance. Importance Performance Analysis (IPA) identified over-the-counter medication counseling, over-the-counter drug selection consultation, pharmacy management, adverse drug reaction monitoring, and understanding and implementation of drug use evaluation as the items that needed focused effort. Borich’s needs were highest in the adverse drug reaction monitoring. Conclusions Overall, high importance and low performance indicate a need for improvement in community pharmacy practice education. Since the demand for education was high in over-the-counter medication counseling, adverse drug reaction monitoring, and OTC drug selection consultation, various supports are urgently needed to strengthen pharmacy practice education in this area in the future.

Background: Innovative Alzheimer’s disease drugs received approval in the United States in 2021 and 2023. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of these novel treatments, elucidate their mechanisms of action, and compare their impact on cognitive function improvement with approved drugs. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of pivotal clinical studies related to Alzheimer’s disease treatments in PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases from January 1st, 2020 to December 31st, 2022. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results: A total of 14 studies were included in this systematic review. When compared to the placebo, the new drugs did not exhibit a statistically significant effect on MMSE (MiniMental State Examination) (mean difference= −0.04, 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: −0.31, 0.23, N=3662, I2 =0%). However, they demonstrated a significant impact on ADAS-cog (Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale) (standardized mean difference= −0.15, 95% CIs: −0.2, −0.1, N=6710, I2 =17%). When compared to the approved drugs, the new drugs showed a statistically significantly lower effect on MMSE (test for subgroup difference Chi2 =23.13, N = 5870, p<0.00001) but showed only a trend of decreased efficacy on ADAS-cog (Chi2 =1.16, N = 8670, p=0.28). Conclusion New drugs yielded diverse clinical endpoint results compared to the placebo, and in comparison to existing approved drugs, they exhibited lower efficacy in improving cognitive function. The safety profile of these new drugs, as reported in clinical trials, was generally well-tolerated.