Qualitative study of medication review in Flanders, Belgium among community pharmacists and general practitioners

Structured medication reviews in Parkinson's disease: pharmacists' views, experiences and needs - a qualitative study

Background

Executing structured medication reviews (SMRs) in primary care to optimize drug treatment is considered standard care of community pharmacists in the Netherlands. Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) often face complex drug regimens for their symptomatic treatment and might, therefore, benefit from an SMR. However, previously, no effect of an SMR on quality of life in PD was found. In trying to improve the case management of PD, it is interesting to understand if and to what extent SMRs in PD patients are of added value in the pharmacist's opinion and what are assumed facilitating and hindering factors.

Objectives

To analyse the process of executing SMRs in PD patients from a community pharmacist's point of view.

Design

A cross-sectional, qualitative study was performed, consisting of face-to-face semi-structured in-depth interviews.

Methods

The interviews were conducted with community pharmacists who executed at least one SMR in PD, till data saturation was reached. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed thematically using an iterative approach.

Results

Thirteen pharmacists were interviewed. SMRs in PD were considered of added value, especially regarding patient contact and bonding, individualized care and its possible effect in the future, although PD treatment is found already well monitored in secondary care. Major constraints were time, logistics and collaboration with medical specialists.

Conclusion

Although community pharmacist-led SMRs are time-consuming and sometimes logistically challenging, they are of added value in primary care in general, and also in PD, of which treatment occurs mainly in secondary care. It emphasizes the pharmacist's role in PD treatment and might tackle future drug-related issues. Improvements concern multidisciplinary collaboration for optimized SMR execution and results.

Risk Management and Patient Safety in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Healthcare systems represent complex organizations within which multiple factors (physical environment, human factor, technological devices, quality of care) interconnect to form a dense network whose imbalance is potentially able to compromise patient safety. In this scenario, the need for hospitals to expand reactive and proactive clinical risk management programs is easily understood, and artificial intelligence fits well in this context. This systematic review aims to investigate the state of the art regarding the impact of AI on clinical risk management processes. To simplify the analysis of the review outcomes and to motivate future standardized comparisons with any subsequent studies, the findings of the present review will be grouped according to the possibility of applying AI in the prevention of the different incident type groups as defined by the ICPS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

On 3 November 2023, a systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was carried out using the SCOPUS and Medline (via PubMed) databases. A total of 297 articles were identified. After the selection process, 36 articles were included in the present systematic review.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The studies included in this review allowed for the identification of three main "incident type" domains: clinical process, healthcare-associated infection, and medication. Another relevant application of AI in clinical risk management concerns the topic of incident reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlighted that AI can be applied transversely in various clinical contexts to enhance patient safety and facilitate the identification of errors. It appears to be a promising tool to improve clinical risk management, although its use requires human supervision and cannot completely replace human skills. To facilitate the analysis of the present review outcome and to enable comparison with future systematic reviews, it was deemed useful to refer to a pre-existing taxonomy for the identification of adverse events. However, the results of the present study highlighted the usefulness of AI not only for risk prevention in clinical practice, but also in improving the use of an essential risk identification tool, which is incident reporting. For this reason, the taxonomy of the areas of application of AI to clinical risk processes should include an additional class relating to risk identification and analysis tools. For this purpose, it was considered convenient to use ICPS classification.

Medication Review: What's in a Name and What Is It about?

BACKGROUND

Medication review is a multifaceted service aimed at optimizing the use of medicines and enhancing the health outcomes of patients. Due to its complexity, it is crucial to clearly describe the service, its variants, and its components to avoid confusion and ensure a better understanding of medication review among healthcare providers.

AIM

This study aims to bring clarity to the origins, definitions, abbreviations, and types of medication reviews, together with the primary criteria that delineate key features of this service.

METHOD

A narrative review approach was employed to clarify the diverse terminology associated with "medication review" services. Relevant references were initially identified through searches on PubMed and Google Scholar, complementing the existing literature known to the authors.

RESULTS

The study uncovers a complicated and sometimes convoluted history of "medication review" in different regions around the world. The initial optimization of medicine use had an economic purpose before evolving subsequently into a more patient-oriented approach. A selection of abbreviations, definitions, and types were outlined to enhance the understanding of the service.

CONCLUSIONS

The study underscores the urgent need for comprehensive information and standardization regarding the content and quality of the services, collectively referred to as "medication review".

From comfort zone to front-line care: perspectives and reflections of community pharmacists entering home-based palliative care

BACKGROUND

Palliative care requires a multidisciplinary team to assist patients and their families to obtain good quality care at the end of life. Typically, community pharmacists have fewer opportunities to provide services for patients with palliative care needs than hospital pharmacists. Moreover, home-based palliative care (HBPC) by pharmacists remains low and there is a lack of research regarding HBPC provided by pharmacists. Therefore, this study sought to understand the views and reflections of community pharmacists in the clinical frontline providing palliative home services.

METHODS

Purposive sampling was used to recruit six community pharmacists for one-on-one, in-depth, semi-structured interviews and the data were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Five major themes emerged: [1] Engagement, [2] Challenge, [3] Mission, [4] Career metamorphosis, and [5] Outlook. The pharmacists described how they engaged in HBPC and faced the challenges. They regarded opioid management as a burden. Moreover, some mentioned that reimbursement for palliative home care is low or non-profitable. They suggested building a platform to exchange advice and legislation adjustments so that they could pass on their experiences to less experienced pharmacists in HBPC.

CONCLUSIONS

The involvement of pharmacists is crucial to provide better palliative care. Although the present study was small and might not fully represent the whole situation, the findings could still inform future education, training, and policy planning to promote pharmacists' participation in palliative care to generalise community palliative care.

General practitioners-community pharmacists pharmacotherapy discussion groups: Analysis of their implementation through a series of case studies

Background

The evolution of primary care practice has led to the implementation of pharmacotherapy discussion groups between general practitioners and community pharmacists (PPPDGs) in some countries. The aim of these groups is to improve drug prescribing practices and strengthen interprofessional relationships.

Objective

To gain more insight into factors involved in successful implementation of PPPDGs.

Methods

PPPDG implementation in three countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland), was analyzed in a series of case studies. A grid describing different evaluation criteria was completed by stakeholders in their respective country. The data collection was followed by a literature review.

Results

Various models were used to implement PPPDGs within each country and different dynamics were encountered. PPPDGs lead to positive effects on the quality and cost-effectiveness of drug prescribing and on the collaboration between general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs). Factors involved in implementation were also identified, such as expectations of GPs and CPs, configuration of the implemented model, and the role of CPs in the healthcare organization.

Conclusions

This study provides insight into the factors involved in successful implementation of PPPDGs in Belgium, the Netherlands and Switzerland. The findings can be used by healthcare professionals to improve the safety, cost-effectiveness of drug prescriptions and systems in primary care. This study offers a starting point for further research in the field.

Key elements in the quality assessment of a type 3 medication review

Background: Medication reviews are a structured evaluation of a patient's pharmacotherapy with the aim of optimizing medicines use and improving health outcomes. This entails detecting drug related problems and recommending interventions. A high level of quality is essential for the successful implementation of this service in community pharmacies but currently there is no instrument or tool to assess that overall quality. Aim: This study investigated the development of quality criteria of type 3 medication reviews (MR3s). Methods: After surveying the literature, an electronic questionnaire was developed to gather information about quality criteria for MR3. This survey, in Dutch, was distributed electronically. Four groups were queried: 1) pharmacists, mainly working in the Netherlands, involved in practice research and contacted through the PRISMA (Practice Research In Collaboration With Pharmacists) foundation, 2) Belgian pharmacy academics and pharmacists active in professional associations (APA), 3) Belgian pharmacists trained in medication review (MR) by the Royal Pharmacists Association of Antwerp (KAVA) and 4) Belgian pharmacy students. The survey included 57 criteria, divided into eight domains, which were ranked according to their importance by the participants. The results were analyzed statistically using the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: The survey was completed by 95 participants, including 42 PRISMA pharmacists, 19 APA pharmacists, 18 KAVA pharmacists and 16 pharmacy students. Opinions from participants from the different groups overlapped significantly. The use of simple and understandable language in the conversation with the patient was considered essential by the majority. Discussing the usefulness and purpose of a MR3 with the patient was also rated highly by all groups. Differences of opinion were present in aspects about laboratory values, the use of specific tools, and reporting to and consultation with the treating physician. The participants themselves formulated a limited number of additional assessment criteria. Conclusion: There was widespread agreement on the hierarchy of the quality assessment criteria for MR3s. Minor differences were related to the experience of the participants. With these results and a small number of suggested extra criteria, a quality assessment instrument for MR3 can be created.

Just a 'romantic idea'? A theory-based interview study on medication review implementation with pharmacy owners

BACKGROUND

Recent legal changes in Germany entitle patients on multiple medications to receive a medication review (MR). However, the provision of MRs is not mandatory and pharmacy owners decide whether to implement this service in their pharmacies.

AIM

To determine pharmacy owners' attitudes towards MRs, explore their experiences with MR implementation and examine their perceptions of barriers and facilitators towards implementation of MRs in community pharmacies.

METHOD

Pharmacy owners were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used with selection criteria being MR-implementation stage, and geographical location of the pharmacy. The topic guide was based on a systematic review and the Framework for Implementation of Services in Pharmacy (FISpH). Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded directly against the FISpH.

RESULTS

Twenty-one pharmacy owners were interviewed. Despite participants' consistent positive attitude towards MRs, most believed that providing MRs on an economically viable basis would be challenging. Several practical suggestions emerged which would enable community pharmacies a smoother implementation of MRs. Suggestions included employing 'change facilitators', who visit and support implementing pharmacies; national awareness campaigns targeting patients and health professionals; reducing bureaucracy; continuing professional development; involving technicians in some MR-tasks; and offering an additional incentive to lower the initial implementation threshold.

CONCLUSION

This research identified numerous factors that are likely to increase owners' and managers' support to the idea of MRs. This may be of interest to any country planning implementation of MRs.

Patient experiences and opinions on medication review: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Medication reviews are a structured critical evaluation of a patient's pharmacotherapy, carried out by a healthcare professional, but are not yet a routine pharmaceutical service in Belgium. A pilot project to initiate an advanced medication review (= type 3 medication review) in community pharmacies was set up by the Royal Pharmacists' Association of Antwerp.

AIM

To investigate the experiences and opinions of patients who participated in this pilot project.

METHOD

Qualitative study through semi-structured interviews with participating patients.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients from six different pharmacies were interviewed. The medication review process with the pharmacist was perceived as positive and instructive by fifteen interviewees. The extra attention that the patient received was highly appreciated. However, the interviews revealed that patients did not fully understand the purpose and structure of this new service or were aware of the subsequent contact and feedback with the general practitioner. Medication reviews in the home setting put patients more at ease, were highly appreciated, and enabled also to address practical problems such as drug dosing or storage requirements.

CONCLUSION

This qualitative study analysed patients' experiences during a pilot project on the implementation of type 3 medication review. Although most patients were enthusiastic about this new service, a lack of patients' understanding of the whole process was also observed. Therefore, better communication to patients by pharmacists and general practitioners about the goals and components of this type of medication review is needed, with the added benefit of increased efficiency.

Assessment of Pharmacists' Willingness to Conduct Medication Use Reviews in Poland

Introduction. Pharmacists play an important role in healthcare. Their functions are evolving and, in many countries, they actively participate in interdisciplinary patient treatment. One of the most common services provided by pharmacists as part of pharmaceutical care in community pharmacies involves medication reviews. Objective. The objective of this study was to evaluate the readiness of pharmacists to conduct medication reviews in community pharmacies. Materials and methods. This study comprises 493 pharmacists from community pharmacies in Poland. A questionnaire (developed for the purposes of this study) was used. It consisted of eight questions regarding readiness to conduct medication reviews, along with personal data. Results. A total of 63.9% of the pharmacists were ready to conduct medication reviews, and 23.1% already had experience in this area. Participants were of the opinion that this service should be funded by the Ministry of Health or a third-party public payer, and overall was valued by the participants at PLN 169.04 (SD = 280.77) net per patient. Conclusions. Pharmacists in Poland have expressed their readiness to conduct medical reviews. Implementation of this service in community pharmacies in Poland can have a significant impact on optimising patient health outcomes.

The value of domiciliary medication reviews - a thematic analysis of pharmacist's views

BACKGROUND

Domiciliary medication reviews are thought to enable comprehensive medication reviews centred around the needs of individuals. However, there is no clear consensus on where the value of these services lie.

AIM

To determine the value of domiciliary medication reviews to service providers through semi-structured focus groups, interviews and thematic analysis.

METHOD

Study participants were recruited from domiciliary medication review services provided in the United Kingdom. Semi-structured focus groups and interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Six themes were identified: the scope of domiciliary medication review services, the professional role, advantages over traditional settings, disadvantages of domiciliary medication reviews for the professional, levels of engagement and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacy professionals believe that the domiciliary setting provides advantages over traditional healthcare settings when conducting medication reviews. They believe it enables a more in-depth review of an individual's medications and needs. The traditional clinical outcomes recorded by services may not be capturing the holistic impact of domiciliary medication reviews.

What Happens after Hospital Discharge? Deficiencies in Medication Management Encountered by Geriatric Patients with Polypharmacy

This study aimed to describe post-discharge medication self-management by geriatric patients with polypharmacy, to describe the problems encountered and to determine the related factors. In a multicenter study from November 2019 to March 2020, data were collected at hospital discharge and two to five days post-discharge. Geriatric patients with polypharmacy were questioned about medication management using a combination of validated (MedMaIDE) and self-developed questionnaires. Of 400 participants, 70% did self-manage medication post-discharge. Patients had a mean of four different deficiencies in post-discharge medication management (SD 2.17, range 0-10). Knowledge-related deficiencies were most common. The number of medicines and the in-hospital provision of medication management by nurses were significant predictors of post-discharge medication management deficiencies. In addition to deficiencies in knowledge, medication-taking ability and obtaining medication, non-adherence and disrupted continuity of medication self-management were common in geriatric patients with polypharmacy post-discharge. Improvements in in-hospital preparation could avoid medication self-management problems at home.