Collaborative and integrated working between general practice and community pharmacies: A realist review of what works, for whom, and in which contexts.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Health Services Research & Policy Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI:10.1177/13558196241290923
Emily Owen-Boukra, Ziyue Cai, Claire Duddy, Nina Fudge, Julia Hamer-Hunt, Fran Husson, Kamal R Mahtani, Margaret Ogden, Deborah Swinglehurst, Malcolm Turner, Cate Whittlesea, Geoff Wong, Sophie Park
{"title":"Collaborative and integrated working between general practice and community pharmacies: A realist review of what works, for whom, and in which contexts.","authors":"Emily Owen-Boukra, Ziyue Cai, Claire Duddy, Nina Fudge, Julia Hamer-Hunt, Fran Husson, Kamal R Mahtani, Margaret Ogden, Deborah Swinglehurst, Malcolm Turner, Cate Whittlesea, Geoff Wong, Sophie Park","doi":"10.1177/13558196241290923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Collaborative and integrated (C + I) working between general practice and community pharmacies has the potential to increase accessibility to services, improve service efficiency and quality of care, and reduce health care expenditures. Many existing studies report challenges and complexities inherent in establishing effective C + I ways of working. The aim of our review is to understand how, when and why working arrangements between General Practitioners (GP) and Community Pharmacists (CP) can provide the conditions necessary for effective communication, decision-making, and C + I working.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a realist review to explore the key contextual factors and mechanisms through which GP-CP C + I working may be achieved. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, IBSS, ASSIA, Sociological Abstracts, Sociology Database and the King's Fund Library Database were searched for articles and grey literature published between January 2000 and April 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 136 documents were included in the final synthesis. Our findings highlight the importance of mutually beneficial remuneration models to support effective integration of services; supportive organisational cultures and values; flexible and agile IT systems/technologies; adequate physical infrastructure and space design to support multidisciplinary teamworking; the importance of establishing patient's trust in collaborative processes between GP-CP; and the need to acknowledge, support and utilise effective triadic relationships.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our research generates new insights regarding how, why and in which contexts C + I working can be achieved between GPs and CPs. The findings of our review can be used to inform future policy, research and clinical practice guidelines for designing and delivering C + I care.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"13558196241290923"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196241290923","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Collaborative and integrated (C + I) working between general practice and community pharmacies has the potential to increase accessibility to services, improve service efficiency and quality of care, and reduce health care expenditures. Many existing studies report challenges and complexities inherent in establishing effective C + I ways of working. The aim of our review is to understand how, when and why working arrangements between General Practitioners (GP) and Community Pharmacists (CP) can provide the conditions necessary for effective communication, decision-making, and C + I working.

Methods: We conducted a realist review to explore the key contextual factors and mechanisms through which GP-CP C + I working may be achieved. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, IBSS, ASSIA, Sociological Abstracts, Sociology Database and the King's Fund Library Database were searched for articles and grey literature published between January 2000 and April 2022.

Results: A total of 136 documents were included in the final synthesis. Our findings highlight the importance of mutually beneficial remuneration models to support effective integration of services; supportive organisational cultures and values; flexible and agile IT systems/technologies; adequate physical infrastructure and space design to support multidisciplinary teamworking; the importance of establishing patient's trust in collaborative processes between GP-CP; and the need to acknowledge, support and utilise effective triadic relationships.

Conclusions: Our research generates new insights regarding how, why and in which contexts C + I working can be achieved between GPs and CPs. The findings of our review can be used to inform future policy, research and clinical practice guidelines for designing and delivering C + I care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全科医生与社区药房之间的合作与整合工作:对在哪些情况下对哪些人有效的现实主义审查。
目标:全科医生和社区药房之间的合作与整合(C + I)工作有可能增加服务的可及性,提高服务效率和医疗质量,并减少医疗开支。现有的许多研究都报告了在建立有效的 C + I 工作方式时所面临的挑战和固有的复杂性。我们的研究旨在了解全科医生(GP)和社区药剂师(CP)之间的工作安排如何、何时以及为何能够为有效沟通、决策和 C + I 工作提供必要条件:我们开展了一项现实主义研究,以探索实现全科医生与社区药师之间 "C + I "工作的关键背景因素和机制。我们检索了 MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO、HMIC、Web of Science、IBSS、ASSIA、Sociological Abstracts、Sociology Database 和 King's Fund Library Database 在 2000 年 1 月至 2022 年 4 月期间发表的文章和灰色文献:共有 136 篇文献被纳入最终综述。我们的研究结果强调了互惠互利的薪酬模式对支持有效整合服务的重要性;支持性的组织文化和价值观;灵活敏捷的信息技术系统/技术;支持多学科团队工作的适当的物理基础设施和空间设计;在全科医生-门诊医生之间的合作过程中建立患者信任的重要性;以及承认、支持和利用有效的三方关系的必要性:我们的研究为全科医生和社区医生之间如何、为何以及在何种情况下实现 "C + I "工作提供了新的见解。我们的研究结果可为未来设计和提供 C + I 护理的政策、研究和临床实践指南提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
期刊最新文献
Health care utilization and costs among coordinated care patients in Southeastern Ontario: A difference-in-differences study of a double propensity score-matched cohort. The role of collaborative governance in translating national cancer programs into network-based practices: A longitudinal case study in Canada. How can specialist investigation agencies inform system-wide learning for patient safety? A qualitative study of perspectives on the early years of the English healthcare safety investigation branch. What can the era of big data and big data analytics mean for health services research? Collaborative and integrated working between general practice and community pharmacies: A realist review of what works, for whom, and in which contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1