Research in Social & Administrative Pharmacy最新文献

Background

Health Care Professionals (HCPs) are the main end-users of digital clinical tools such as electronic prescription systems. For this reason, it is of high importance to include HCPs throughout the design, development and evaluation of a newly introduced system to ensure its usefulness, as well as confirm that it tends to their needs and can be integrated in their everyday clinical practice.

Methods

In the context of the PrescIT project, an electronic prescription platform with three services was developed (i.e., Prescription Check, Prescription Suggestion, Therapeutic Prescription Monitoring). To allow an iterative process of discovery through user feedback, design and implementation, a two-phase evaluation was carried out, with the participation of HCPs from three hospitals in Northern Greece. The two-phase evaluation included presentations of the platform, followed by think-aloud sessions, individual platform testing and the collection of qualitative as well as quantitative feedback, through standard questionnaires (e.g., SUS, PSSUQ).

Results

Twenty one HCPs (8 in the first, 18 in the second phase, and five present in both) participated in the two-phase evaluation. HCPs comprised clinicians varying in their specialty and one pharmacist. Clinicians' feedback during the first evaluation phase already deemed usability as “excellent” (with SUS scores ranging from 75 to 95/100, showing a mean value of 86.6 and SD of 9.2) but also provided additional user requirements, which further shaped and improved the services. In the second evaluation phase, clinicians explored the system's usability, and identified the services' strengths and weaknesses. Clinicians perceived the platform as useful, as it provides information on potential adverse drug reactions, drug-to-drug interactions and suggests medications that are compatible with patients' comorbidities and current medication.

Conclusions

The developed PrescIT platform aims to increase overall safety and effectiveness of healthcare services. Therefore, including clinicians in a two-phase evaluation confirmed that the introduced system is useful, tends to the users’ needs, does not create fatigue and can be integrated in their everyday clinical practice to support clinical decision and e-prescribing.

Background

The daily work of community pharmacists includes dispensing antibiotics, but little is known about how this should be done to ensure quality use of antibiotics.

Objective

To define specific tasks of the community pharmacist when dispensing antibiotics and to assess to what extent these tasks can be implemented in practice in Europe.

Methods

A Delphi study with community pharmacist experts in the European Economic Area. Statements on potential tasks for pharmacists during the antibiotic dispensing process were based on a systematic literature review. Participants rated the statements for importance and feasibility of implementation in practice in 3 rounds on a scale from 1 to 9. Consensus of importance was defined as ≥ 80 % of experts rating a statement between 7 and 9. An online expert meeting was conducted between rounds 1 and 2. Scores for all statements were analysed descriptively.

Results

Overall, 38 experts from 21 countries participated in the study. Experts reached consensus on 108 statements within 5 themes: 1) collaboration with prescribers, 2) checking prescriptions and dispensing, 3) counselling, 4) education, and 5) pharmacy services. Potential tasks included advising and collaborating with prescribers, performing safety checks, and having access to specific prescription information. Additionally, pharmacists should counsel patients related to the dispensed antibiotic and on antimicrobial resistance and infectious diseases. With few exceptions, pharmacists should not dispense antibiotics without prescriptions or prescribe antibiotics. Consensus on feasibility of implementation was only reached for statements in the categories “counselling patients” and “education”. Barriers to changing practice included structure of the healthcare system, resistance to change from prescribers or pharmacy staff, lack of time and finances, legal barriers, and patient expectations.

Conclusion

Community pharmacists have an important role when dispensing antibiotics. This study provides important steps towards better community pharmacy antibiotic dispensing practices throughout the EEA.

Background

Macro and meso level factors that influence the participation by clinical pharmacists in ward rounds include pharmacy management culture, commitment to ward rounds and adequate time for ward rounds being included in workload models. The ‘micro’ level factors that affect the involvement of clinical pharmacists in ward rounds have not been widely explored.

Objective

Explore ‘micro’ level factors to gain insight into clinical pharmacists' participation in interprofessional ward rounds in inpatient settings through the lens of social cognitive theory.

Method

A qualitative focused ethnographic study with five clinical pharmacists, four medical practitioners, one allied health professional and one nurse was conducted in three metropolitan hospitals in Southern Australia. Seven hours of semi-structured interview (n = 11) and 76-h of observations (n = 5) were conducted. A qualitative descriptive analysis was conducted (guided by Spradley) followed by reflexive thematic-analysis (according to Braun and Clarke's technique).

Results

Three micro level factors influencing clinical pharmacist participation in ward rounds are: (1) Cognitive mindset of clinical pharmacists, (2) Behavioural conduct of clinical pharmacists, and (3) Social rules of the ward. Clinical pharmacists that did not participate in ward round reconciled their moral distress by transferring information without clinical judgement or interpretation of the patient scenario to medical practitioners. Clinical pharmacists that did participate in ward rounds demonstrated credibility by making relevant recommendations with a holistic lens. This enabled clinical pharmacists to be perceived as trustworthy by medical practitioners. Positive experiences of participating in ward rounds contributed to their cognitive upward spiral of thoughts and emotions, fostering continued participation.

Conclusion

Clinical pharmacists participate in ward rounds when they develop a positive mindset about ward round participation and perceive ward rounds as an enabler to the establishment of trusted professional relationships with medical practitioners. This trusted relationship creates an environment where the pharmacist develops confidence in making relevant recommendations.

Objective

The Opioid and Naloxone Education (ONE) Program focuses on community pharmacy-based patient screening and interventions to improve population health with regard to opioid use. The purpose of this paper is to reevaluate the ONE Program performance using the RE-AIM model, in comparison to the review performed in 2019.

Methods

The program performance of the ONE Program was evaluated from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2022 was evaluated using the five domains of the RE-AIM model. Reach was defined as the proportion of patients receiving opioid prescriptions who completed the screening. Efficacy was defined as the proportion of individuals identified as at risk who received a pharmacist intervention. Adoption was defined as the proportion of community pharmacies who enrolled in the ONE Program. Implementation was defined as the proportion of pharmacies that enrolled that provided at least five patient screenings. Maintenance was defined as the proportion of pharmacies that completed at least one screening three months. These results were compared against evaluation of the program from October 12, 2018 to June 1, 2019.

Results

Approximately 7.28 % of patients receiving opioid prescriptions were screened for risk of opioid misuse and accidental overdose (Reach). Of the patients screened, 97.4 % of patients at risk for opioid misuse or accidental overdose received a pharmacist-led intervention (Efficacy). Additionally, 49.6 % of the pharmacist that enrolled in the ONE Program completed at least five screenings (79 %) and of those, 86.4 % maintained the program three months later.

Conclusions

In years four and five of implementation, the ONE Program demonstrated improvement in four of the five domains of the RE-AIM model compared to years one and two. However, Reach declined over time. This reevaluation has demonstrated the importance of longitudinal program assessment, and the possibility of improved program performance over time.

Objective

Medication management of patients with polypharmacy is highly complex. We aimed to validate a novel Artificial Pharmacology Intelligence (API) algorithm to optimize the medication review process in a comprehensive, personalized, and scalable way.

Materials and methods

The study was conducted on anonymized retrospective electronic health records (EHR) of 49 patients. Each patient's file was reviewed by the API system, a clinical pharmacist, and a judging committee. Validation was assessed by comparing the overall agreement of the judging committee (as the gold standard, blinded to the identity of the analyzer) to both the API system and clinical pharmacists' conclusions. Five medication-related problem (MRP) categories were assessed: duplication of therapy, age-related issues, incorrect dose, current side effects and future side effects' risk. For each category the overall validity parameters, agreement, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity and specificity were analyzed.

Results

The agreement between the API system and the judging committee was 93.5 % (95 % CI 92.7–94.4), while the agreement between the clinical pharmacists and the judging committee was 73.9 % (95 % CI 72.5–75.3). The PPV was 92.2 % (90.9–93.5) and NPV was 94.2 % (93.1–95.2) for the API system and 76.3 % (69.8–82.8) and 73.5 % (72.3–74.8) respectively for the clinical pharmacists.

Discussion

AI systems can equip clinicians with sophisticated tools and scale manual processes such as comprehensive medication reviews, thus reducing MRPs and drug-related hospitalizations related to multidrug treatments. The API system validated in this study provided comprehensive, multidrug, multilayered analysis intended to bridge the innate complexity of personalized polypharmacy treatment.

Conclusions

The API system was validated as a tool for providing actionable clinical insights non-inferior to a manual clinical review of a clinical pharmacist. The API system showed promising results in reducing MRPs.

Background

Pharmacist-led medication regimen simplification using a structured approach can reduce unnecessary medication regimen complexity in residential aged care facilities (RACFs), but no studies have investigated simplification by different health professionals, nor the extent to which simplification is recommended during comprehensive medication reviews.

Objectives

To compare medication regimen simplification opportunities identified by pharmacists, general medical practitioners (GPs), and geriatricians and to determine if pharmacists identified simplification opportunities during routinely conducted comprehensive medication reviews in RACFs for these same residents.

Methods

Three pharmacists, three GPs and three geriatricians independently applied the Medication Regimen Simplification Guide for Residential Aged CarE (MRS GRACE) to medication data for 83 residents taking medications at least twice daily. Interrater agreement was calculated using Fleiss's kappa. Pharmacist medication review reports for the same 83 residents were then examined to identify if the pharmacists conducting these reviews had recommended any of the simplification strategies.

Results

Overall, 77 residents (92.8 %) taking medications at least twice daily could have their medication regimen simplified by at least one health professional. Pharmacists independently simplified 53.0–77.1 % of medication regimens (Κ = 0.60, 95%CI 0.46–0.75, indicating substantial agreement), while GPs simplified 74.7–89.2 % (Κ = 0.44, 95%CI 0.24–0.64, moderate agreement) and geriatricians simplified 41.0–66.3 % (Κ = 0.30, 95%CI 0.16–0.44, fair agreement). No simplification recommendations were included in the reports previously prepared by pharmacists as part of the comprehensive medication reviews undertaken for these residents.

Conclusion

Pharmacists, GPs, and geriatricians can all identify medication regimen simplification opportunities, although these opportunities differ within and between professional groups. Although opportunities to simplify medication regimens during comprehensive medication reviews exist, simplification is not currently routinely recommended by pharmacists performing these reviews in Australian RACFs.

Objective

This study aimed to explore and identify motivational factors and barriers for pharmacy personnel participation in specific opioid mitigation programs, using the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) as an investigational framework.

Methods

A naturalistic inquiry method was employed involving semi-structured interviews with pharmacy personnel to assess their intentions, attitudes, normative beliefs, and behaviors towards participating in naloxone dispensing and provision of at-home drug disposal solutions. Purposive sampling was utilized to recruit participants, with saturation achieved after 12 interviews. Interviews were transcribed and coded to identify recurring themes.

Results

Four primary themes emerged: 1) the value and benefits of helping others, emphasizing societal, patient, and environmental benefits; 2) limits and barriers to participation, including financial concerns, management support, and time constraints; 3) pharmacists’ intrinsic motivators, highlighting personal motivations and differentiation between programs for specific patient types; and 4) program implementation challenges and strategies.

Conclusion

The findings underscore the applicability of the TPB in understanding pharmacy engagement in opioid abatement programs. Despite facing barriers such as financial considerations and time constraints, the overall positive attitudes towards the programs indicate a strong motivation to contribute to public health efforts. Addressing identified barriers and leveraging motivators could enhance participation, potentially mitigating the opioid crisis. Future research should incorporate patient perspectives to fully understand the impact and effectiveness of pharmacy-led interventions, such as naloxone dispensing and disposal solutions, in opioid misuse prevention.

Background

Approximately half of people prescribed medications do not take them as prescribed. There is a significant unmet need regarding the barriers to medication adherence not being addressed in primary care. There is no agreement on which outcomes should be measured and reported in trials of medication adherence interventions.

Objective

To develop a core outcome set (COS) for trials of medication adherence interventions in primary care for adults prescribed medications for long-term health conditions.

Methods

A list of potentially relevant outcomes from the literature was developed. Using a two-round Delphi survey of stakeholder groups representing patients and their carers; primary care staff; and academic researchers with an interest in medication adherence; each outcome was scored in terms of importance for determining the effectiveness of medication adherence interventions in primary care. This was followed by two consensus workshops, where importance, as well as feasibility and acceptability of measurement, were considered in order to finalise the COS.

Results

One hundred and fifty people took part in Delphi Round 1 and 101 took part in Round 2. Eight people attended the workshops (four attendees per workshop). Seven outcomes were identified as most important, feasible and acceptable to collect in medication adherence trials: Health-related quality of life, number of doses taken, persistence with medicines, starting (initiating) a medicine, relevance of the medication adherence intervention for an individual, mortality, and adverse medicine events.

Conclusions

This COS represents the minimum outcomes that should be collected and reported in all medication adherence trials undertaken in primary care. When developing and finalizing the COS, feasibility and acceptability of collection of outcomes has been considered. In addition to the COS, medication adherence trials can choose to include outcomes to suit their specific context such as the health condition associated with their medication adherence intervention.

Credibility refers to the trustworthiness, genuineness, and plausibility of the research findings and has always been a contentious issue in qualitative research, particularly for those conducting studies on the hermeneutic phenomenology paradigm. The relationship between credibility and high qualitative research is noted by many qualitative scholars. Member checking, also known as participant or respondent validation, is a technique for exploring the credibility of results where data or results are returned to participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences. Although member-checking has long been accepted as the gold standard in quantitative research, research shows that it is not the pinnacle for expressing rigor in Heideggerian hermeneutic phenomenology because it contradicts many of the underpinning philosophies. Within this article the author explores how member checking has been used in published research and presents a brief overview of the various discourses on member checking in qualitative research. The author discusses the importance of evaluating whether the method fits with the theoretical position of a study and the importance to consider how member checking was undertaken and for what purpose. It is essential that researchers are transparent about what they hope to achieve with the method and how their claims about credibility and validity fit with their epistemological stance.