药物审查过程中产生的活动术语标准化的分类开发:德尔菲研究。

IF 1.5 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY International Journal of Pharmacy Practice Pub Date : 2024-03-06 DOI:10.1093/ijpp/riae002
Mohammed S Alharthi, Sion Scott, Carmel Hughes, Christine Bond, Ernieda Hatah, Linda Bryant, Richard Holland, Sam Kosari, Wasim Baqir, Yoon Loke, David Wright
{"title":"药物审查过程中产生的活动术语标准化的分类开发:德尔菲研究。","authors":"Mohammed S Alharthi, Sion Scott, Carmel Hughes, Christine Bond, Ernieda Hatah, Linda Bryant, Richard Holland, Sam Kosari, Wasim Baqir, Yoon Loke, David Wright","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riae002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medication review (MR) is the systematic assessment of a patient's medications for safety and effectiveness by a healthcare professional. The language used to describe MR activity, such as stopped medicine and increased dose, should be consistent across studies to assist researchers compare how different services operate and identify their mechanism of impact.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To develop an international taxonomy of standardized terms and activity definitions related to medication reviews.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This was a three-stage Delphi-based consensus study with international medication review experts. A systematic review provided MR activity terms for the survey. Experts rated their consensus on each activity term and its definition on a Likert scale and provided written feedback. The consensus was 75% panel agreement. At each stage, consensus elements were retained, and feedback was used to revise definitions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven experts were recruited for the study (response rate 15.2%) from four countries: the United Kingdom (n = 4), New Zealand (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), and Malaysia (n = 1). The following terms achieved consensus: the term Medication as a descriptor for MR terms; discontinue medication, start medication, dose increase, dose decrease, dosage form change, and medication safety and efficacy monitor to describe MR activity; Educate to describe the delivery of healthcare professionals and patients/carers education.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Standardized medication review activity terms and definitions have been selected for universal adoption in all future MR research to facilitate a meaningful comparison of process evaluations within different settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taxonomy development for term standardization in activity resulting from medication review processes: a Delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammed S Alharthi, Sion Scott, Carmel Hughes, Christine Bond, Ernieda Hatah, Linda Bryant, Richard Holland, Sam Kosari, Wasim Baqir, Yoon Loke, David Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ijpp/riae002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medication review (MR) is the systematic assessment of a patient's medications for safety and effectiveness by a healthcare professional. The language used to describe MR activity, such as stopped medicine and increased dose, should be consistent across studies to assist researchers compare how different services operate and identify their mechanism of impact.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To develop an international taxonomy of standardized terms and activity definitions related to medication reviews.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This was a three-stage Delphi-based consensus study with international medication review experts. A systematic review provided MR activity terms for the survey. Experts rated their consensus on each activity term and its definition on a Likert scale and provided written feedback. The consensus was 75% panel agreement. At each stage, consensus elements were retained, and feedback was used to revise definitions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven experts were recruited for the study (response rate 15.2%) from four countries: the United Kingdom (n = 4), New Zealand (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), and Malaysia (n = 1). The following terms achieved consensus: the term Medication as a descriptor for MR terms; discontinue medication, start medication, dose increase, dose decrease, dosage form change, and medication safety and efficacy monitor to describe MR activity; Educate to describe the delivery of healthcare professionals and patients/carers education.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Standardized medication review activity terms and definitions have been selected for universal adoption in all future MR research to facilitate a meaningful comparison of process evaluations within different settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riae002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riae002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:用药审查(MR)是由医护人员对患者用药的安全性和有效性进行的系统性评估。用于描述 MR 活动(如停药和增加剂量)的语言应在各项研究中保持一致,以帮助研究人员比较不同服务的运作方式并确定其影响机制:方法:这是一项基于德尔菲共识的三阶段研究,由国际药物评论专家参与。系统综述为调查提供了 MR 活动术语。专家们用李克特量表对每个活动术语及其定义的共识进行评分,并提供书面反馈。专家组的共识率为 75%。每个阶段都会保留共识要素,并根据反馈意见修改定义:本研究共招募了 7 位专家(回复率为 15.2%),他们分别来自 4 个国家:英国(4 位)、新西兰(1 位)、澳大利亚(1 位)和马来西亚(1 位)。以下术语达成了共识:"用药"(Medication)作为 MR 术语的描述词;"停药"、"开始用药"、"增加剂量"、"减少剂量"、"改变剂型 "和 "药物安全性和有效性监测 "用于描述 MR 活动;"教育"(Educate)用于描述医护人员和患者/护理人员的教育:结论:我们选择了标准化的用药回顾活动术语和定义,供今后所有的 MR 研究普遍采用,以便对不同环境下的过程评估进行有意义的比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Taxonomy development for term standardization in activity resulting from medication review processes: a Delphi study.

Background: Medication review (MR) is the systematic assessment of a patient's medications for safety and effectiveness by a healthcare professional. The language used to describe MR activity, such as stopped medicine and increased dose, should be consistent across studies to assist researchers compare how different services operate and identify their mechanism of impact.

Aim: To develop an international taxonomy of standardized terms and activity definitions related to medication reviews.

Method: This was a three-stage Delphi-based consensus study with international medication review experts. A systematic review provided MR activity terms for the survey. Experts rated their consensus on each activity term and its definition on a Likert scale and provided written feedback. The consensus was 75% panel agreement. At each stage, consensus elements were retained, and feedback was used to revise definitions.

Results: Seven experts were recruited for the study (response rate 15.2%) from four countries: the United Kingdom (n = 4), New Zealand (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), and Malaysia (n = 1). The following terms achieved consensus: the term Medication as a descriptor for MR terms; discontinue medication, start medication, dose increase, dose decrease, dosage form change, and medication safety and efficacy monitor to describe MR activity; Educate to describe the delivery of healthcare professionals and patients/carers education.

Conclusion: Standardized medication review activity terms and definitions have been selected for universal adoption in all future MR research to facilitate a meaningful comparison of process evaluations within different settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice (IJPP) is a Medline-indexed, peer reviewed, international journal. It is one of the leading journals publishing health services research in the context of pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, medicines and medicines management. Regular sections in the journal include, editorials, literature reviews, original research, personal opinion and short communications. Topics covered include: medicines utilisation, medicine management, medicines distribution, supply and administration, pharmaceutical services, professional and patient/lay perspectives, public health (including, e.g. health promotion, needs assessment, health protection) evidence based practice, pharmacy education. Methods include both evaluative and exploratory work including, randomised controlled trials, surveys, epidemiological approaches, case studies, observational studies, and qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups. Application of methods drawn from other disciplines e.g. psychology, health economics, morbidity are especially welcome as are developments of new methodologies.
期刊最新文献
Immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients from the perspective of pharmaceutical care: a scoping review. Nausea and vomiting in pregnancy: a cross-sectional study of community pharmacists in the UK. Correction to: Lifeguard Pharmacy: the co-development of a new community pharmacy response service for people in danger from domestic abuse or suicidal ideation. Trends, prescribing patterns, and determinants of initial antiepileptic drug treatment in older epileptic patients. Pandemic preparedness of Egyptian community pharmacists and potential facilitators to the successful implementation of a community pharmacy coronavirus disease 2019 referral service: a cross-sectional survey.
×
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