Allergic rhinitis (AR) affects a large percentage of paediatric patients. With the wide array of available agents, it has become a challenge to choose the most appropriate treatment for patients. Second-generation antihistamines have become increasingly popular because of their comparable efficacy and lower incidence of adverse effects relative to their first-generation counterparts, and the safety and efficacy of this drug class are established in the adult population. Data on the use of the second-generation antihistamines oral cetirizine, levocetirizine, loratadine, desloratadine and fexofenadine, and the leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast as well as azelastine nasal spray in infants and children are evaluated in this review. These agents have been found to be relatively safe and effective in reducing symptoms associated with AR in children. Alternative dosage forms such as liquids or oral disintegrating tablets are available for most agents, allowing ease of administration to most young children and infants; however, limited data are available regarding use in infants for most agents, except desloratadine, cetirizine and montelukast. Unlike their predecessors, such as astemizole and terfenadine, the newer second-generation antihistamines and montelukast appear to be well tolerated, with absence of cardiotoxicities. Comparative studies are limited to cetirizine versus ketotifen, oxatomide and/or montelukast. Although second-generation antihistamines and montelukast are deemed relatively safe for use in paediatric patients, there are some noteworthy drug interactions to consider when selecting an agent. Given the wide variety of available agents for treatment of AR in paediatric patients, the safety and efficacy data available for specific age groups, type of AR, dosage form availability and cost should be considered when selecting treatment for AR in infants and children.

Faculty members' contributions to research and scholarship are measured by a variety of indices. Assessment also has become an integral part of the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education's accreditation process for professional programs. This review describes some of the newer indices available for faculty scholarship assessment. Recently described metrics include the h-index, m-quotient, g-index, h(2) index, a-index, m-index, r-index, ar index, and the creativity index. Of the newer scholarship metrics available, the h-index and m-quotient will likely have the most widespread application in the near future. However, there is no substitute for thoughtful peer review by experienced academicians as the primary method of research and scholarship assessment.

The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the treatment options available and their usage and outcomes in the treatment of insomnia in the USA. Both pharmacotherapy and behavioral therapy are recommended in the physician guidelines for insomnia management. Although pharmacotherapy can produce a rapid pharmacologic effect, for long-term effectiveness, behavioral therapy can be considered for chronic primary insomniac patients. The cost of behavioral therapy is a notable barrier to its prescription for patients with sleep difficulties. Increased utilization of both behavioral- and pharmacotherapy may reduce insomnia-related healthcare costs and increase health-related quality of life. Further research should focus on the role of these therapies in outcomes of insomnia management.

BACKGROUND: Scholarship is an essential component of academic pharmacy. Department chairs are considered role models and mentors to junior faculty, but their publication record has not been documented. OBJECTIVE: To quantify publication patterns of pharmacy practice chairs in general and, specifically, at health sciences center (HSC)-based versus non-HSC-based and public versus private colleges of pharmacy. METHODS: Pharmacy practice chairs were identified using the 2006-2007 roster of faculty from the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Of the 89 colleges of pharmacy in the roster, 11 listed no pharmacy practice chair and 5 listed more than one. Data were collected on the remaining 73 schools by searching each chair's name on PubMed and Web of Science (WoS). Data on total publications, publications per year, total citations, citations per article, h-index, and m quotient were collected. RESULTS: A total of 2394 papers published by 73 pharmacy practice chairs were found in a search of PubMed. The mean number of total publications per chair was 33 (95% CI 21 to 44). The mean number of publications per year was 1.4 using PubMed and 1.6 using WoS. Mean h-index was 8.0 (95% CI 6.3 to 9.6). Mean number of total citations was 410 (95% CI 252 to 568). Thirty-three percent (n = 24) had less than 10 lifetime publications and 18% had more than 50 lifetime publications. HSC-based chairs averaged 51.3 papers while non-HSC-based chairs averaged 19.1 (p < 0.01). Similar data were found for total citations (HSC = 673 vs non-HSC = 216; p < 0.001). Public school chairs had an average of 41.5 articles cited on PubMed, versus 15 for private school chairs (p < 0.01). Public school chairs had an average h-index of 9.7 versus 4.4 for private school chairs (p < 0.001), and an average of 9.2 citations per article compared with 5.2 for private school chairs (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide a normative pattern of publication metrics and record for pharmacy practice chairs and demonstrate marked variability in scholarly productivity.

The journal impact factor is an important measure of citation frequency during a 1-year period for articles published over the previous 2 years. However, it has many limitations that should be considered in evaluating the quality of scholarship published in the journal.

Background: Access to a special dosage form of a medication is essential when administration to infants and children and selected other populations is required. Some drugs necessary for pediatric patients are not commercially available in dosage forms appropriate for use in this population. These drugs may be prepared extemporaneously for use in individual patients. Physical and chemical properties of drugs and excipients should be considered when preparing extemporaneous formulations. These formulations, however, may lack studies to document stability, bioavailability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and tolerability. Objective: The goal of this article was to discuss factors involved in extemporaneous compounding of pediatric dosage forms. Methods: The proceedings from a Pediatric Formulation Initiative workshop sponsored by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, held December 6 and 7, 2005, in Bethesda, Maryland, were used as a source of information for this article. A literature search of PubMed/ MEDLINE (1966-October 2008) was also conducted, using the search terms extemporaneous, drug formulations, and pediatric. Results: Access to age-appropriate drug formulations is critical to provide effective and well-tolerated medications to patients. There continues to be a need for extemporaneous formulations of brand and generic drugs for neonates, infants, and children. Potential solutions to current limitations include the need to develop a prioritized list of essential formulations, increased funding of research, dissemination of data, and monitoring of clinical effectiveness and tolerability during use in various age groups of pediatric patients and the sharing of these clinical experiences. Conclusion: To achieve desired therapeutic outcomes in pediatric patients, access to age-appropriate, stable, effective, and well-tolerated drug formulations is essential.

Peer reviewed publications are the primary source of important new information. This editorial provides tips for writing various sections of research papers, review articles, and case reports. Additional topics discussed include making decisions about authorship, selecting a journal for submission of an article, understanding the peer review process and expectations of editors and reviewers, and revising the article. Successful authors combine appropriate knowledge and experience, personal attributes, and effective collaborations to produce insightful and important contributions to the literature.

PURPOSE: The stability of iobenguane sulfate stored at 4-7 degrees C over 91 days was studied. METHODS: An iobenguane sulfate solution at a concentration of 2.2 mg/mL was prepared in a top-fill i.v. bag using 143 mg of iobenguane sulfate and 65 mL of Sterile Water for Injection, USP. The solution was poured through a 0.22- mum filter assembly for sterilization into 60 1-mL polycarbonate plastic syringes. Each syringe was filled with 0.9 mL of the iobenguane sulfate solution and stored in amber plastic bags at 4-7 degrees C. The stability of iobenguane sulfate was analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography immediately after solution preparation and on days 7, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, and 91. Samples were inspected for chemical purity by observing for particulate formation and color change. RESULTS: The mean concentration of ioben-guane exceeded 93% of the initial concentration in all samples throughout the 91-day study period. No changes in color or turbidity were observed. CONCLUSION: Iobenguane sulfate 2.2 mg/mL was stable for 91 days when stored in polycarbonate syringes at 4-7 degrees C.