Background: Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a frequent cause of injury in patients. Our aim was to assess pharmacist interventions and their association with ADEs and potential adverse drug events (PADE). Methods: The search criteria: a published RCT, evidence of a pharmacist intervention, a comparison control group, and measurement of ADEs or PADEs. The information sources included MEDLINE, Embase, and two other databases through September 19, 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for RCTs. A random-effects model for pooled studies was employed Results: Fifteen references meeting inclusion criteria were discovered. For ADEs, the pooled results showed a statistically significant benefit of pharmacist intervention in comparison to the control group (RR = 0.86; [95% CI 0.80-0.94); P = 0.0005. The heterogeneity was insignificant (P = 0.72; I 2 = 0%). Patients receiving a pharmacist intervention were 14% less likely for ADE than those who did not receive a pharmacist intervention. The estimated number of patients needed to prevent one ADE across all patient locations was 33. For PADEs, the pooled results did not show a statistically significant benefit for pharmacist intervention in comparison to the control group (RR = 0.79; [95% CI 0.47 – 1.32]; P =0.37.There was substantial heterogeneity in the pooled studies (P = 0.01; I 2 = 77%). However, there was a statistically significant subgroup difference (P = 0.005) for the intervention type. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs seeking to understand the association of pharmacist interventions with ADEs and PADEs. The risk of having an ADE is reduced by a seventh for patients receiving a pharmacist care intervention versus no such intervention. This fraction could be higher for certain high-risk patients. The estimated number of patients needed to be followed across all patient locations to prevent one preventable ADE across all patient locations is 33. Also, a subgroup analysis of pharmacist intervention focus suggests that further research is necessary to fully understand the impact of TOC pharmacist intervention on PADEs. If validated, these findings have potential to significantly reduce drug-related morbidity and related healthcare costs.

Survival of Wilms tumor (WT) is >90% in high-resource settings but <30% in low-resource settings. Adapting a standardized surgical approach to WT is challenging in low-resource settings, but a local control strategy is crucial to improving outcomes. Objective: Provide resource-sensitive recommendations for the surgical management of WT. Methods: We performed a systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE through July 7, 2020, and used the GRADE approach to assess evidence and recommendations. Recommendations: Initiation of treatment should be expedited, and surgery should be done in a high-volume setting. Cross-sectional imaging should be done to optimize preoperative planning. For patients with typical clinical features of WT, biopsy should not be done before chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy should precede surgical resection. Also, resection should include a large transperitoneal laparotomy, adequate lymph node sampling, and documentation of staging findings. For WT with tumor thrombus in the inferior vena cava, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be given before en bloc resection of the tumor and thrombus and evaluation for viable tumor thrombus. For those with bilateral WT, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be given for 6–12 weeks. Neither routine use of complex hilar control techniques during nephron-sparing surgery, nor nephron-sparing resection for unilateral WT with a normal contralateral kidney is recommended. When indicated, postoperative radiotherapy should be administered within 14 days of surgery. Post-chemotherapy pulmonary oligometastasis should be resected when feasible, if local protocols allow omission of whole-lung irradiation in patients with non-anaplastic histology stage IV WT with pulmonary metastasis without evidence of extrapulmonary metastasis. Conclusion: We provide evidence-based recommendations for the surgical management of WT, considering the benefits/risks associated with limited-resource settings.