OBJECTIVE: To survey practicing pharmacists regarding their use of and familiarity with six dietary supplement information references. METHODS: Pharmacists attending a March 2005 continuing education program at the Albany College of Pharmacy on interactions between drugs and dietary supplements were surveyed about their use of and views on dietary supplement information references. Included in the survey were six references: Physicians Desk Reference (PDR) for Herbal Medicines; Facts and Comparisons: Review of Natural Products; German Commission E Monographs; Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database (online or textbook format); Micromedex: AltMedDex; and The Natural Therapeutics Pocket Guide. The survey was repeated by mail 1 year after the program. RESULTS: Of the 91 attendees at the program, 58 completed the survey, and 25 individuals returned the 1-year survey. Of those completing the surveys, 80% had more than 10 years in practice, 95% had bachelor's degrees, and most practiced in community or institutional pharmacies. At baseline, fewer than 40% had "heard of" four of the six references. Pharmacists were most familiar with PDR for Herbal Medicines and Facts and Comparisons: Review of Natural Products. Familiarity rates increased at 1 year for five of the six references, though, again, overall rates were low and differences from baseline were not statistically significant for any of the six references. Usage rates increased for two references (Facts and Comparisons: Review of Natural Products and Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database) at 1 year and declined for the remaining four. CONCLUSION: Experienced pharmacists in both community and institutional settings infrequently use and are unfamiliar with dietary supplement information references, including those found in studies to be of the highest quality. Education on the availability and features of these references could benefit pharmacists and potentially change usage patterns.
OBJECTIVE: To survey practicing pharmacists regarding their use of and familiarity with six dietary supplement information references. METHODS: Pharmacists attending a March 2005 continuing education program at the Albany College of Pharmacy on interactions between drugs and dietary supplements were surveyed about their use of and views on dietary supplement information references. Included in the survey were six references: Physicians Desk Reference (PDR) for Herbal Medicines; Facts and Comparisons: Review of Natural Products; German Commission E Monographs; Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database (online or textbook format); Micromedex: AltMedDex; and The Natural Therapeutics Pocket Guide. The survey was repeated by mail 1 year after the program. RESULTS: Of the 91 attendees at the program, 58 completed the survey, and 25 individuals returned the 1-year survey. Of those completing the surveys, 80% had more than 10 years in practice, 95% had bachelor's degrees, and most practiced in community or institutional pharmacies. At baseline, fewer than 40% had "heard of" four of the six references. Pharmacists were most familiar with PDR for Herbal Medicines and Facts and Comparisons: Review of Natural Products. Familiarity rates increased at 1 year for five of the six references, though, again, overall rates were low and differences from baseline were not statistically significant for any of the six references. Usage rates increased for two references (Facts and Comparisons: Review of Natural Products and Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database) at 1 year and declined for the remaining four. CONCLUSION: Experienced pharmacists in both community and institutional settings infrequently use and are unfamiliar with dietary supplement information references, including those found in studies to be of the highest quality. Education on the availability and features of these references could benefit pharmacists and potentially change usage patterns.