Identification, classification, and documentation of drug related problems in community pharmacy practice in Europe: a scoping review.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Pub Date : 2025-01-08 DOI:10.1007/s11096-024-01834-7
Danielle Hochhold, Lotte Stig Nørgaard, Derek Stewart, Anita Elaine Weidmann
{"title":"Identification, classification, and documentation of drug related problems in community pharmacy practice in Europe: a scoping review.","authors":"Danielle Hochhold, Lotte Stig Nørgaard, Derek Stewart, Anita Elaine Weidmann","doi":"10.1007/s11096-024-01834-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Drug-related problems (DRPs) are significant issues in healthcare contributing to adverse health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. While community pharmacists play a pivotal role in identifying, classifying, and documenting DRPs, there is a need to map approaches undertaken.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this scoping review was to examine the approaches to identifying, classifying, and documenting DRPs in community pharmacies in Europe, and their associated barriers and facilitators.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The scoping review was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search was conducted across 11 databases from inception until March 2023. Studies of all designs reporting DRPs in European community pharmacies were included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened independently by two researchers, followed by data extraction and synthesis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded 67 relevant studies. Forty-eight studies described approaches to DRP identification as predominantly relying on professional knowledge and computer software. The classification methods, described in 41 studies, varied with reports of predefined systems and computer-generated classifications. Documentation approaches were described in 53 studies and were primarily computer-based. Facilitators included electronic support systems, pharmacist experience, while barriers encompassed the complexity of classification as well as variations in training, IT solutions, operational structures, and implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a lack of a standardized approach to identifying, classifying, and documenting DRPs in European community pharmacies. A framework for pharmacist education and a time-saving approach to documenting DRPs consistently could serve to overcome the barriers to their identification and documentation. Furthermore, the implementation of a standardised approach to classifying DRPs could facilitate comparison of the management of DRPs across Europe.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-024-01834-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Drug-related problems (DRPs) are significant issues in healthcare contributing to adverse health outcomes and increased healthcare costs. While community pharmacists play a pivotal role in identifying, classifying, and documenting DRPs, there is a need to map approaches undertaken.

Aim: The aim of this scoping review was to examine the approaches to identifying, classifying, and documenting DRPs in community pharmacies in Europe, and their associated barriers and facilitators.

Method: The scoping review was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The search was conducted across 11 databases from inception until March 2023. Studies of all designs reporting DRPs in European community pharmacies were included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened independently by two researchers, followed by data extraction and synthesis.

Results: The search yielded 67 relevant studies. Forty-eight studies described approaches to DRP identification as predominantly relying on professional knowledge and computer software. The classification methods, described in 41 studies, varied with reports of predefined systems and computer-generated classifications. Documentation approaches were described in 53 studies and were primarily computer-based. Facilitators included electronic support systems, pharmacist experience, while barriers encompassed the complexity of classification as well as variations in training, IT solutions, operational structures, and implementation.

Conclusion: There is a lack of a standardized approach to identifying, classifying, and documenting DRPs in European community pharmacies. A framework for pharmacist education and a time-saving approach to documenting DRPs consistently could serve to overcome the barriers to their identification and documentation. Furthermore, the implementation of a standardised approach to classifying DRPs could facilitate comparison of the management of DRPs across Europe.

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
欧洲社区药房实践中药物相关问题的鉴定、分类和文献记录:范围综述。
背景:药物相关问题(DRPs)是医疗保健中的重要问题,会导致不良的健康结果和医疗保健费用的增加。虽然社区药剂师在识别、分类和记录drp方面发挥着关键作用,但有必要对所采取的方法进行绘图。目的:本范围综述的目的是研究欧洲社区药房中识别、分类和记录drp的方法,以及相关的障碍和促进因素。方法:根据Joanna Briggs研究所的指南进行范围审查,并根据PRISMA-ScR指南进行报告。从成立到2023年3月,在11个数据库中进行了搜索。纳入了在欧洲社区药房报告drp的所有设计的研究。题目、摘要和全文由两位研究者独立筛选,然后进行数据提取和综合。结果:检索得到67项相关研究。48项研究将DRP识别方法描述为主要依赖专业知识和计算机软件。在41项研究中描述的分类方法随着预定义系统和计算机生成分类的报告而变化。53项研究描述了文献方法,主要以计算机为基础。促进因素包括电子支持系统、药剂师经验,而障碍包括分类的复杂性以及培训、IT解决方案、操作结构和实施方面的差异。结论:在欧洲社区药房,缺乏一种标准化的方法来识别、分类和记录drp。一个药剂师教育框架和一种节省时间的方法来一致地记录drp,可以帮助克服他们的识别和记录的障碍。此外,实施一种标准化的药品分类方法可以促进对整个欧洲的药品管理进行比较。
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
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
期刊最新文献
Community pharmacists improving equitable access to contraceptive methods: a commentary. Bacillus coagulans TBC169 probiotics for intestinal function recovery after gynecological open surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patient and hospital staff perspectives on introducing pharmacist-led medication reviews at an orthopedic ward: a mixed methods pilot study. Medication-induced causes of delirium in patients with and without dementia: a systematic review of published neurology guidelines. Defining polypharmacy in older adults: a cross-sectional comparison of prevalence estimates calculated according to active ingredient and unique product counts.
×
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