Clinical pharmacy services often involve multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions. However, current pharmacy practice models vary across different countries. Despite the documented benefits of clinical pharmacy services, the characteristics of pharmacist-led interventions in different countries have not yet been adequately explored and described. Therefore, this protocol outlines the methodology for a proposed scoping review aiming to investigate various types of multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions and the outcomes used to evaluate their effectiveness within secondary care settings. Additionally, the scoping review will map the current evidence surrounding the characteristics of interventions and outcomes reported across various countries of socioeconomic status.

The scoping review will be conducted according to the JBI Methodology for Scoping Reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. We will systematically search the following electronic databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EbscoHost), Embase (embase.com), Scopus (scopus.com), Cochrane Library (cochranelibrary.com) and APA PsycInfo (Ovid). Additionally, the reference lists of identified reviews and included full texts will be searched for relevant papers. Grey literature sources, such as International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) website, will be searched. We will include primary studies published in the English language from January 2013 to December 2023, involving secondary care multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions. Two independent reviewers will screen studies against eligibility criteria and use a piloted data extraction form to extract relevant information. We will extract relevant data, complete a tabular summary from each included publication and analyse it.

Ethical approval is not required as we will be using data from publicly available literature sources. Findings will be disseminated in publications and presentations with relevant stakeholders. We aim to map available evidence across the breadth of studies that have reported multifaceted pharmacist-led interventions and their outcomes.

Simultaneous urine testing for albumin (UAlb) and serum creatinine (SCr), that is, ‘dual testing,’ is an accepted quality measure in the management of diabetes. As chronic kidney disease (CKD) is defined by both UAlb and SCr testing, this approach could be more widely adopted in kidney care.

We assessed time trends and facility-level variation in the performance of outpatient dual testing in the integrated Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system.

This retrospective cohort study included patients with any inpatient or outpatient visit to the VHA system during the period 2009–2018. Dual testing was defined as UAlb and SCr testing in the outpatient setting within a calendar year. We assessed time trends in dual testing by demographics, comorbidities, high-risk (eg, diabetes) specialty care and facilities. A generalised linear mixed-effects model was applied to explore individual and facility-level predictors of receiving dual testing.

We analysed data from approximately 6.9 million veterans per year. Dual testing increased, on average, from 17.4% to 21.2%, but varied substantially among VHA centres (0.3%–43.7% in 2018). Dual testing was strongly associated with diabetes (OR 10.4, 95% CI 10.3 to 10.5, p

Dual testing for CKD in high-risk specialties is increasing but remains low. This appears primarily due to low rates of testing for albuminuria. Promoting dual testing in high-risk patients will help to improve disease management and patient outcomes.

Breast cancer survivors (BCSs) experience more severe symptoms of genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) than healthy postmenopausal women. As hormonal therapy with oestrogen should be avoided in BCSs, finding an effective and safe therapy to address vaginal symptoms and sexual dysfunction is urgently needed. Physical methods may be promising alternatives for the specificities of this group of women. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of physical methods (laser and radiofrequency) for treating GSM in BCSs.

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SciELO, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov databases will be searched. A search strategy was developed to retrieve clinical trials that evaluate the efficacy and safety of any physical method (laser or radiofrequency) used for GSM in BCSs. No date or language restrictions will be imposed. Two authors will independently select studies by title, abstract and full text to meet the inclusion criteria. Data will be extracted, and the risk of bias will be evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). Review Manager 5.4.1 will be used for data synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be used to assess the strength of the evidence.

This study reviews the published data; thus, obtaining ethical approval is unnecessary. The findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

CRD42023387680.