比较患者对自动配药系统和传统配药系统的满意度:横断面研究。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Patient preference and adherence Pub Date : 2024-11-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/PPA.S492802
Palanisamy Amirthalingam, Abdulrahman Sulaiman Alruwaili, Omar Ahmed Albalawi, Fayez Mohammed Alatawi, Saleh F Alqifari, Ahmed D Alatawi, Ahmed Aljabri
{"title":"比较患者对自动配药系统和传统配药系统的满意度:横断面研究。","authors":"Palanisamy Amirthalingam, Abdulrahman Sulaiman Alruwaili, Omar Ahmed Albalawi, Fayez Mohammed Alatawi, Saleh F Alqifari, Ahmed D Alatawi, Ahmed Aljabri","doi":"10.2147/PPA.S492802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The adoption of automated drug dispensing systems (ADDS) in hospital pharmacies is a global trend, driven by its potential to reduce dispensing errors, minimize prescription filling time, and ultimately, improve patient care services. However, a significant research gap exists in the field, as a comprehensive assessment of patient satisfaction with ADDS is currently lacking. This study, with its comprehensive approach, aims to fill this gap by comparing patient satisfaction between hospital pharmacies implementing ADDS and traditional drug dispensing systems (TDDS).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The cross-sectional study was conducted in hospitals adopting ADDS and TDDS. All the outpatients aged 18 or above who visited the pharmacy were included, and severely ill patients were excluded from the study. A 17-item, 5-point Likert scale questionnaire assessed the participant's satisfaction. The questionnaire has four domains: pharmacy administration, dispensing practice, patient education, and dispensing system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The demographics of the study participants were normally distributed between ADDS and TDDS according to chi-square analysis. The mean participant satisfaction was significantly (P<0.05) higher in ADDS than in TDDS regarding all the items of dispensing practice and dispensing system domains. Three items related to the pharmacy administration domain showed significant participant satisfaction with ADDS. However, the participants' satisfaction showed no significant difference (p=0.176) between ADDS and TDDS in terms of the cleanliness of the pharmacy. Also, the participant's satisfaction between ADDS and TDDS was not statistically significant regarding the pharmacist's explanation of the side effects (p=0.850) and provision of all necessary information to the patient (p=0.061) in the patient education domain.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patient satisfaction was higher in the ADDS participants than in TDDS regarding pharmacy administration, patient education, dispensing practice, and systems. However, pharmacists in ADDS need to be motivated to transfer the advantages of ADDS to patient care, including comprehensive patient education, particularly on side effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":19972,"journal":{"name":"Patient preference and adherence","volume":"18 ","pages":"2337-2345"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11585295/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Patient Satisfaction with Automated Drug Dispensing System and Traditional Drug Dispensing System: A Cross-Sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Palanisamy Amirthalingam, Abdulrahman Sulaiman Alruwaili, Omar Ahmed Albalawi, Fayez Mohammed Alatawi, Saleh F Alqifari, Ahmed D Alatawi, Ahmed Aljabri\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/PPA.S492802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The adoption of automated drug dispensing systems (ADDS) in hospital pharmacies is a global trend, driven by its potential to reduce dispensing errors, minimize prescription filling time, and ultimately, improve patient care services. However, a significant research gap exists in the field, as a comprehensive assessment of patient satisfaction with ADDS is currently lacking. This study, with its comprehensive approach, aims to fill this gap by comparing patient satisfaction between hospital pharmacies implementing ADDS and traditional drug dispensing systems (TDDS).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The cross-sectional study was conducted in hospitals adopting ADDS and TDDS. All the outpatients aged 18 or above who visited the pharmacy were included, and severely ill patients were excluded from the study. A 17-item, 5-point Likert scale questionnaire assessed the participant's satisfaction. The questionnaire has four domains: pharmacy administration, dispensing practice, patient education, and dispensing system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The demographics of the study participants were normally distributed between ADDS and TDDS according to chi-square analysis. The mean participant satisfaction was significantly (P<0.05) higher in ADDS than in TDDS regarding all the items of dispensing practice and dispensing system domains. Three items related to the pharmacy administration domain showed significant participant satisfaction with ADDS. However, the participants' satisfaction showed no significant difference (p=0.176) between ADDS and TDDS in terms of the cleanliness of the pharmacy. Also, the participant's satisfaction between ADDS and TDDS was not statistically significant regarding the pharmacist's explanation of the side effects (p=0.850) and provision of all necessary information to the patient (p=0.061) in the patient education domain.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patient satisfaction was higher in the ADDS participants than in TDDS regarding pharmacy administration, patient education, dispensing practice, and systems. However, pharmacists in ADDS need to be motivated to transfer the advantages of ADDS to patient care, including comprehensive patient education, particularly on side effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient preference and adherence\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"2337-2345\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11585295/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient preference and adherence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S492802\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient preference and adherence","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S492802","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:医院药房采用自动配药系统(ADDS)是全球趋势:医院药房采用自动配药系统 (ADDS) 是一种全球趋势,因为它具有减少配药错误、缩短处方配药时间并最终改善患者护理服务的潜力。然而,由于目前缺乏对患者对 ADDS 满意度的全面评估,该领域还存在着巨大的研究空白。本研究采用综合方法,旨在通过比较实施 ADDS 和传统配药系统 (TDDS) 的医院药房的患者满意度来填补这一空白:这项横断面研究在采用 ADDS 和 TDDS 的医院中进行。所有到药房就诊的 18 岁及以上门诊患者均被纳入研究范围,重症患者被排除在外。研究采用 17 个项目、5 点李克特量表问卷评估受试者的满意度。问卷包括四个方面:药房管理、配药实践、患者教育和配药系统:根据卡方分析,ADDS 和 TDDS 参与者的人口统计学特征呈正态分布。结论:患者满意度在 ADDS 和 TDDS 之间呈正态分布:在药房管理、患者教育、配药实践和系统方面,ADDS 参与者的患者满意度高于 TDDS 参与者。然而,需要激励 ADDS 的药剂师将 ADDS 的优势转化为患者护理,包括全面的患者教育,尤其是副作用方面的教育。
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
Comparing Patient Satisfaction with Automated Drug Dispensing System and Traditional Drug Dispensing System: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Introduction: The adoption of automated drug dispensing systems (ADDS) in hospital pharmacies is a global trend, driven by its potential to reduce dispensing errors, minimize prescription filling time, and ultimately, improve patient care services. However, a significant research gap exists in the field, as a comprehensive assessment of patient satisfaction with ADDS is currently lacking. This study, with its comprehensive approach, aims to fill this gap by comparing patient satisfaction between hospital pharmacies implementing ADDS and traditional drug dispensing systems (TDDS).

Patients and methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted in hospitals adopting ADDS and TDDS. All the outpatients aged 18 or above who visited the pharmacy were included, and severely ill patients were excluded from the study. A 17-item, 5-point Likert scale questionnaire assessed the participant's satisfaction. The questionnaire has four domains: pharmacy administration, dispensing practice, patient education, and dispensing system.

Results: The demographics of the study participants were normally distributed between ADDS and TDDS according to chi-square analysis. The mean participant satisfaction was significantly (P<0.05) higher in ADDS than in TDDS regarding all the items of dispensing practice and dispensing system domains. Three items related to the pharmacy administration domain showed significant participant satisfaction with ADDS. However, the participants' satisfaction showed no significant difference (p=0.176) between ADDS and TDDS in terms of the cleanliness of the pharmacy. Also, the participant's satisfaction between ADDS and TDDS was not statistically significant regarding the pharmacist's explanation of the side effects (p=0.850) and provision of all necessary information to the patient (p=0.061) in the patient education domain.

Conclusion: Patient satisfaction was higher in the ADDS participants than in TDDS regarding pharmacy administration, patient education, dispensing practice, and systems. However, pharmacists in ADDS need to be motivated to transfer the advantages of ADDS to patient care, including comprehensive patient education, particularly on side effects.

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
Patient preference and adherence
Patient preference and adherence MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
354
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Patient Preference and Adherence is an international, peer reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the growing importance of patient preference and adherence throughout the therapeutic continuum. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original research, modeling and clinical studies across all therapeutic areas. Patient satisfaction, acceptability, quality of life, compliance, persistence and their role in developing new therapeutic modalities and compounds to optimize clinical outcomes for existing disease states are major areas of interest for the journal. As of 1st April 2019, Patient Preference and Adherence will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
期刊最新文献
Public Perceptions of Surgeon Attire in Saudi Arabia. Associations of Social Psychological Factors and OHRQoL in Periodontitis Patients: A Structural Equation Modeling Study. Comparing Patient Satisfaction with Automated Drug Dispensing System and Traditional Drug Dispensing System: A Cross-Sectional Study. Development and Testing of a Multi-Component Intervention to Improve Medication Literacy in Glaucoma Patients. Flu Vaccination Among Patients with Noncommunicable Diseases: A Survey About Awareness, Usage, Gaps and Barriers in Europe.
×
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