Medication review and reconciliation with cooperation between pharmacist and general practitioner and the benefit for the patient:a systematic review

This article systematically reviews the literature on the impact of collaboration between pharmacists and general practitioners and describes its effect on patients' health. A systematic literature search provided 1041 articles. After first review of title and abstract, 152 articles remained. After review of the full text, 83 articles were included. All included articles are presented according to the following variables: (i) reference; (ii) design and setting of the study; (iii) inclusion criteria for patients; (iv) description of the intervention; (v) whether a patient interview was performed to involve patients' experiences with their medicine-taking behaviour; (vi) outcome; (vii) whether healthcare professionals received additional training; and (viii) whether healthcare professionals received financial reimbursement. Many different interventions are described where pharmacists and general practitioners work together to improve patients' health. Only nine studies reported hard outcomes, such as hospital (re)admissions; however, these studies had different results, not all of which were statistically significant. Randomized controlled trials should be able to describe hard outcomes, but large patient groups will be needed to perform such studies. Patient involvement is important for long-term success

Quality indicators for measuring the level of patients' involvement in the pharmaceutical care process

Patient-centred counseling is an integral part of the pharmaceutical care process. Quality in- dicators can be valuable tools to measure the level of patients’ involvement in their personal healthcare. The aim of the study was to validate two quality indicators for community pharmacy care focusing on patient involvement. As part of the EDQM Pharmaceutical Care Quality Indicators Project (Council of Europe), at least 10 patients per indicator were recruited in each community pharmacy in Serbia and Po- land. Pharmacists targeted patients aged 18-65 years starting chronic treatment (Indicator 1) and elderly patients with polymorbidity receiving at least five chronic treatment medicines (Indicator 2). Based on patients’ answers to a questionnaire, patient-pharmacist consultations took place. For Indicator 2, patients were also offered a medication review. In total, 66% of Serbian patients and 29% Polish patients, for In- dicator 1, were engaged in pharmacist-patient consultations; 96% of Serbian and 84% of Polish elderly patients subsequently participated in medication reviews. Community pharmacists can increase patients’ involvement in their own pharmaceutical care, and there is a need for such services. This study defines a pragmatic approach to encourage/support the implementation of the pharmaceutical care philosophy and working methods in European community pharmacies

The evaluation of an intervention based on the application of patient self-completion concordance forms in Dutch community pharmacies and the effect on adherence to chronic medication

Objective: To evaluate the use of patient self-completion concordance forms and to determine the effect of patient counselling by using concordance forms on adherence to chronic medication. Methods: Patients with a prescription for new chronic treatment were randomised in an intervention or control group. The intervention group received a concordance form to fill in at home and to discuss during a consultation 2 weeks later in the pharmacy. The control group received the Usual information and instruction on how to use the medicine. Afterwards, all patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire about their use of medicines and contact with the pharmacy employees. Adherence to the medicine was determined using rates of prescription refills after 6 months of use. Results: The questionnaires showed that patients were satisfied about the concordance model. After 6 months of use, 79% of the patients from both intervention and control group were defined as adherent. Conclusions: There was no significant difference found in adherence between intervention and control group. Practice implications: Use five selected questions from the concordance form which provided most answers. Focus on one drug group and have more consultation moments. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved

A Pharmaceutical Care Program to Improve Adherence to Statin Therapy:A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Despite the well-known beneficial effects of statins, many patients do not adhere to chronic medication regimens. OBJECTIVE: To implement and assess the effectiveness of a community pharmacy based pharmaceutical care program developed to improve patients' adherence to statin therapy. METHODS: An open-label, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at 26 community pharmacies in the Netherlands. New users of statins who were aged 18 years or older were randomly assigned to receive either usual care or a pharmacist intervention. The intervention consisted of 5 individual counseling sessions by a pharmacist during a 1-year period. During these sessions, patients received structured education about the importance of medication adherence, lipid levels were measured, and the association between adherence and lipid levels was discussed. Adherence to statin therapy was assessed as discontinuation rates 6 and 12 months after statin initiation, and as the medication possession ratio (MPR), and compared between the pharmaceutical care and usual care groups. RESULTS: A total of 899 subjects (439 in the pharmaceutical care group and 460 in the usual care group) were evaluable for effectiveness analysis. The pharmaceutical care program resulted in a significantly lower rate of discontinuation within 6 months after initiating therapy versus usual care (HR 0.66, 95% Cl 0.46 to 0.96). No significant difference between groups was found in discontinuation at 12 months (HR 0.84, 95% Cl 0.65 to 1.10). Median MPR was very high (>99%) in both groups and did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of a community pharmacy based pharmaceutical care program to improve medication adherence in new users of statins. Frequent counseling sessions (every 3 months) are necessary to maintain the positive effects on discontinuation. Although improvements are modest, the program can be applied easily to a larger population and have a large impact, as the interventions are relatively inexpensive and easy to, implement in clinical practice

Development of a web-based pharmaceutical care plan to facilitate collaboration between healthcare providers and patients

Background To facilitate collaboration between different healthcare providers and to exchange patient data we developed a paper-based tool, which also enabled to plan interventions and follow-up activities: the PCP. Interviews with participating healthcare providers concluded the PCP was a very useful tool to collect and share patient data. A disadvantage was the time spent to collect all information. We therefore developed our PCP into a web-based tool: the web-based PCP (W-PCP).Objectives Development of a W-PCP to (1) provide healthcare providers with information from pharmacist- and GP computer systems and (2) facilitate collaboration between healthcare providers and patients.Method The W-PCP was used in three research lines, two in primary care and one in a hospital setting. Outcomes measures were defined as satisfaction about efficiency and effectiveness during data sharing and documentation in providing care and conducting medication reviews using the W-PCP.First experiences concerning the use of W-PCP in a primary care setting were collected by a questionnaire and interviews with pharmacists and GPs using the W-PCP.Results A questionnaire was sent to 38 healthcare providers. 17 healthcare providers returned the questionnaire. The use of W-PCP resulted in positive experiences from participating healthcare providers. On the basis of experiences and requirements collected, the application will be further developed.Conclusions The W-PCP application can potentially support successful collaboration between different healthcare providers and patients, which is important for medication therapy management. With this application, a successful collaboration between different healthcare providers and patients could be achieved.</p

The degree of integration of non-dispensing pharmacists in primary care practice and the impact on health outcomes: A systematic review

Background: A non-dispensing pharmacist conducts clinical pharmacy services aimed at optimizing patients individual pharmacotherapy. Embedding a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice enables collaboration, probably enhancing patient care. The degree of integration of non-dispensing pharmacists into multidisciplinary health care teams varies strongly between settings. The degree of integration may be a determinant for its success. Objectives: This study investigates how the degree of integration of a non-dispensing pharmacist impacts medication related health outcomes in primary care. Methods: In this literature review we searched two electronic databases and the reference list of published literature reviews for studies about clinical pharmacy services performed by non-dispensing pharmacists physically co-located in primary care practice. We assessed the degree of integration via key dimensions of integration based on the conceptual framework of Walshe and Smith. We included English language studies of any design that had a control group or baseline comparison published from 1966 to June 2016. Descriptive statistics were used to correlate the degree of integration to health outcomes. The analysis was stratified for disease-specific and patient-centered clinical pharmacy services. Results: Eighty-nine health outcomes in 60 comparative studies contributed to the analysis. The accumulated evidence from these studies shows no impact of the degree of integration of non-dispensing pharmacists on health outcomes. For disease specific clinical pharmacy services the percentage of improved health outcomes for none, partial and fully integrated NDPs is respectively 75%, 63% and 59%. For patient-centered clinical pharmacy services the percentage of improved health outcomes for none, partial and fully integrated NDPs is respectively 55%, 57% and 70%. Conclusions: Full integration adds value to patient-centered clinical pharmacy services, but not to disease-specific clinical pharmacy services. To obtain maximum benefits of clinical pharmacy services for patients with multiple medications and comorbidities, full integration of non-dispensing pharmacists should be promoted

Implications of a clinical medication review and a pharmaceutical care plan of polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder

Background A clinical medication review, including patient involvement, is expected to improve pharmaceutical care. Objective To determine whether a clinical medication review followed by a pharmaceutical care plan decreases the number of potential drug-related problems (DRPs) and pharmaceutical care issues (PCIs) and leads to a positive effect on relevant clinical and laboratory parameters for elderly cardiovascular patients with multiple drug use. Setting Randomized controlled trial in eight primary care settings in the Netherlands. Method Elderly polypharmacy patients with a cardiovascular disorder were randomized into two groups. Intervention patients received a clinical medication review, followed by a pharmaceutical care plan developed in cooperation between these patients' pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs), and agreed to by the patients. Control patients received care as usual. Patient data were collected at the start of the study (t = 0) and after 1-year follow-up (t = 1). Main outcome measure Decrease in potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs, improvement of clinical and laboratory parameters. Results 512 patients were included. An average of 2.2 potential DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs were defined per patient in the intervention group. After 1-year follow-up, 47.2 % of potential DRPs and PCIs were resolved. In total, 156 care interventions were proposed (0.9/patient), 108 of which were implemented after 1 year (69.2 %). For control-group patients, a total of 47 proposed care interventions were documented for 255 patients (0.2/patient); after 1 year, 43 had been implemented (91.5 %). The study intervention (p <0.001) and the number of medicines used (p = 0.030) had a significant effect on the number of interventions proposed. Small biochemical changes in cardiovascular risk factors did occur, but the differences were small and not considered clinically relevant. Conclusion The integrated use of a clinical medication review with a pharmaceutical care plan in a primary care setting supports the detection of and decrease in DRPs and pharmaceutical PCIs in almost half of the patients. Its benefit in terms of control of cardiovascular risk factors and safety parameters was relatively low. Risk stratification might be necessary to decide which patients might benefit most from this type of intervention

Controversy and consensus on a clinical pharmacist in primary care in the Netherlands

Background Controversy about the introduction of a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice hampers implementation. Objective The aim of this study is to systematically map the debate on this new role for pharmacists amongst all stakeholders to uncover and understand the controversy and consensus. Setting: Primary health care in the Netherlands. Method Q methodology. 163 participants rank-ordered statements on issues concerning the integration of a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice. Main outcome measure: Stakeholder perspectives on the role of the non-dispensing pharmacist and pharmaceutical care in primary care. Results This study identified the consensus on various features of the non-dispensing pharmacist role as well as the financial, organisational and collaborative aspects of integrating a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice. Q factor analysis revealed four perspectives: “the independent community pharmacist”, “the independent clinical pharmacist”, “the dependent clinical pharmacist” and “the medication therapy management specialist”. These four perspectives show controversies to do with the level of professional independency of the non-dispensing pharmacist and the level of innovation of task performance. Conclusion Despite the fact that introducing new professional roles in healthcare can lead to controversy, the results of this Q study show the potential of a non-dispensing pharmacist as a pharmaceutical care provider and the willingness for interprofessional collaboration. The results from the POINT intervention study in the Netherlands will be an important next step in resolving current controversies

Association between workarounds and medication administration errors in bar-code-assisted medication administration in hospitals

Objective: To study the association of workarounds with medication administration errors using barcode-assisted medication administration (BCMA), and to determine the frequency and types of workarounds and medication administration errors. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study in Dutch hospitals using BCMA to administer medication. Direct observation was used to collect data. Primary outcome measure was the proportion of medication administrations with one or more medication administration errors. Secondary outcome was the frequency and types of workarounds and medication administration errors. Univariate and multivariate multilevel logistic regression analysis were used to assess the association between workarounds and medication administration errors. Descriptive statistics were used for the secondary outcomes. Results: We included 5793 medication administrations for 1230 inpatients. Workarounds were associated with medication administration errors (adjusted odds ratio 3.06 [95% CI: 2.49-3.78]). Most commonly, procedural workarounds were observed, such as not scanning at all (36%), not scanning patients because they did not wear a wristband (28%), incorrect medication scanning, multiple medication scanning, and ignoring alert signals (11%). Common types of medication administration errors were omissions (78%), administration of non-ordered drugs (8.0%), and wrong doses given (6.0%). Discussion: Workarounds are associated with medication administration errors in hospitals using BCMA. These data suggest that BCMA needs more post-implementation evaluation if it is to achieve the intended benefits for medication safety. Conclusion: In hospitals using barcode-assisted medication administration, workarounds occurred in 66% of medication administrations and were associated with large numbers of medication administration errors

Controversy and consensus on a clinical pharmacist in primary care in the Netherlands

Background Controversy about the introduction of a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice hampers implementation. Objective The aim of this study is to systematically map the debate on this new role for pharmacists amongst all stakeholders to uncover and understand the controversy and consensus. Setting: Primary health care in the Netherlands. Method Q methodology. 163 participants rank-ordered statements on issues concerning the integration of a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice. Main outcome measure: Stakeholder perspectives on the role of the non-dispensing pharmacist and pharmaceutical care in primary care. Results This study identified the consensus on various features of the non-dispensing pharmacist role as well as the financial, organisational and collaborative aspects of integrating a non-dispensing pharmacist in primary care practice. Q factor analysis revealed four perspectives: "the independent community pharmacist", "the independent clinical pharmacist", "the dependent clinical pharmacist" and "the medication therapy management specialist". These four perspectives show controversies to do with the level of professional independency of the non-dispensing pharmacist and the level of innovation of task performance. Conclusion Despite the fact that introducing new professional roles in healthcare can lead to controversy, the results of this Q study show the potential of a non-dispensing pharmacist as a pharmaceutical care provider and the willingness for interprofessional collaboration. The results from the POINT intervention study in the Netherlands will be an important next step in resolving current controversies