9 research outputs found

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

    Get PDF
    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

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

    Get PDF
    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

    Zoekgedrag van aios huisartsgeneeskunde in de praktijk

    No full text
    Achtergrond Dokters hebben vaak vragen tijdens patiëntcontacten. Informatie over dergelijke vragen bij aios huisartsgeneeskunde is er nauwelijks. Wij onderzochten hoe vaak en hoe aios antwoorden zoeken op vragen in de praktijk. Methode Zes groepen derdejaars aios huisartsgeneeskunde vulden vragenlijsten in en hielden acht opeenvolgende praktijkdagen een logboek bij. Ze verzamelden informatie over het consult, klinische vragen, zoekgedrag en de impact van de gevonden antwoorden. Resultaten Zesenzeventig aios rapporteerden 1533 vragen bij 7300 patiënten, dit zijn 0,2 (sd 0,1) vragen per patiënt. Voor de meeste vragen zochten ze naar een antwoord (gemiddeld 0,8 (sd 0,2) per vraag), meestal tijdens het consult (61% van de zoekacties). Ze vonden vaak een antwoord (gemiddeld 0,8 (sd 0,2) per zoekactie). In 28% van de gevallen raadpleegden ze daarvoor collega-huisartsen of hun opleider en in 26% NHG-Standaarden. Internet en andere bronnen gebruikten ze niet of nauwelijks. Conclusie Aios rapporteren één vraag per vijf patiënten, waarvoor ze meestal een antwoord zoeken en vinden. Ze gebruiken daarbij vooral collega-huisartsen en NHG-Standaarden

    General practice trainees' information searching strategies for clinical queries encountered in daily practice

    No full text
    Background. Earlier studies have shown that clinical queries are common among doctors. Data on the information-seeking behaviour of general practice (GP) trainees are scarce though, and numbers studied are small. Objective. The objective of this study was to determine how often and how GP trainees search for answers to clinical queries encountered in daily clinical practice. Methods. Third-year GP trainees kept logs on all patient contacts for eight consecutive practice days. Information was obtained on patient contacts (description), clinical queries (frequency, type), seeking behaviour (frequency, moment, reason not to search, resources used, duration of search) and answers (frequency, impact). Descriptive analyses were performed; frequencies and percentages were computed. We calculated the number of clinical queries per patient, the number of searches per query and the number of answers per search. Results. Seventy-six trainees reported 1533 clinical queries about 7300 patients presenting 7619 complaints [mean of 0.2 queries per patient, standard deviation (SD) 0.1]. For most of the queries trainees pursued an answer (mean of 0.8 per query, SD 0.2), mostly during consultation (61% of searches), and frequently retrieved answers (mean of 0.8 per search, SD 0.17) they reported to improve clinical decision making in 26%. Most common resources were colleagues or supervisors (28%), and national GP guidelines (26%). The median duration of a search was 4 minutes (interquartile range 3). Conclusion. GP trainees have one clinical query per five patients. They often attempted to find answers and reported to succeed in most of the searches, primarily by consulting supervisors or colleagues and national GP guidelines

    The degree of integration of pharmacists in primary care and the impact on health outcomes

    No full text
    __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-centred 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-centred 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-centred 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

    The degree of integration of pharmacists in primary care and the impact on health outcomes

    No full text
    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 o 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
    corecore