Roles, barriers and behavioral determinants related to community pharmacists' involvement in optimizing opioid therapy for chronic pain: a qualitative study

Application of behavioural theories, models, and frameworks in pharmacy practice research based on published evidence: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacy practice research often focuses on the design, implementation and evaluation of pharmacy services and interventions. The use of behavioural theory in intervention research allows understanding of interventions' mechanisms of action and are more likely to result in effective and sustained interventions.

AIM

To collate, summarise and categorise the reported behavioural frameworks, models and theories used in pharmacy practice research.

METHOD

PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science and EBSCO (CINAHL PLUS, British Education index, ERIC) were systematically searched to capture all pharmacy practice articles that had reported the use of behavioural frameworks, theories, or models since inception of the database. Results were filtered to include articles published in English in pharmacy practice journals. Full-text screening and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. A narrative synthesis of the data was adopted. Studies were reviewed for alignment to the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework to identify in which phase(s) of the research that the theory/model/framework had been employed.

RESULTS

Fifty articles met the inclusion criteria; a trend indicating an increasing frequency of behavioural theory/frameworks/models within pharmacy practice research was identified; the most frequently reported were Theory of Planned Behaviour and Theoretical Domains Framework. Few studies provided explicit and comprehensive justification for adopting a specific theory/model/framework and description of how it underpinned the research was lacking. The majority were investigations exploring determinants of behaviours, or facilitators and barriers to implementing or delivering a wide range of pharmacy services and initiatives within a variety of clinical settings (aligned to Phase 1 UK MRC framework).

CONCLUSION

This review serves as a useful resource for future researchers to inform their investigations. Greater emphasis to adopt a systematic approach in the reporting of the use of behavioural theories/models/frameworks will benefit pharmacy practice research and will support researchers in utilizing behavioural theories/models/framework in aspects of pharmacy practice research beyond intervention development.

A scoping literature review of pharmacy-based opioid misuse screening and brief interventions

BACKGROUND

Although prescription opioid dispensing rates have continued to decrease, overdose deaths involving prescription opioids have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening and brief interventions (SBI) are an effective prevention strategy to identify and address opioid misuse and safety risks. Emerging literature on pharmacy-based SBI needs to be systematically appraised to develop robust interventions.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to conduct a scoping review of the literature regarding pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI to identify relevant literature that explore the topic, evaluate the patient-centeredness of included studies, and explore the use of dissemination and implementation science in the literature.

METHODS

The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses -Scoping reviews (PRISMA-Sc) guidelines. We searched PubMed, CINHAL, PsychInfo, and Scopus for studies regarding pharmacy-based SBI, published in the last 20 years. We also conducted a separate grey literature search. Two of three total reviewers screened each abstract individually and identified eligible full-texts for inclusion. We critically appraised quality of included studies and qualitatively synthesized the relevant information.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 21 studies (categorized as intervention, descriptive, and observational research) and 3 grey literature reports. Of the recently published 21 studies, 11 were observational research, with six interventions in the pilot stages. Screening tools varied but naloxone was the brief intervention in 15 of the 24 results. Only eight studies had high validity, reliability, and applicability and only five were patient-centered. Implementation science principles were addressed in eight studies (mainly interventions). Overall, the findings suggest high potential for evidence-based SBI to be successful.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the review suggested a strong lack of a patient-centered and implementation science-focused approach to designing pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI. Findings suggest that a patient-centered, implementation focused approach is needed for effective and sustained pharmacy-based opioid misuse SBI.

Addressing the Opioid Crisis—The Need for a Pain Management Intervention in Community Pharmacies in Canada: A Narrative Review

Background: The opioid crisis is a public health concern in Canada with a continued rise in deaths and presents a significant economic impact on the healthcare system. There is a need to develop and implement strategies for decreasing the risk of opioid overdoses and other opioid-related harms resulting from the use of prescription opioids. Pharmacists, as medication experts and educators, and as one of the most accessible frontline healthcare providers, are well positioned to provide effective opioid stewardship through a pain management program focused on improving pain management for patients, supporting appropriate prescribing and dispensing of opioids, and supporting safe and appropriate use of opioids to minimize potential opioid misuse, abuse, and harm. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and grey literature to determine the characteristics of an effective community pharmacy-based pain management program, including the facilitators and barriers to be considered. Discussion: An effective pain management program should be multicomponent, address other co-morbid conditions in addition to pain, and contain a continuing education component for pharmacists. Solutions to implementation barriers, including pharmacy workflow; addressing attitudes beliefs, and stigma; and pharmacy remuneration, as well as leveraging the expansion of scope from the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act exemption to facilitate implementation, should be considered. Conclusions: Future work should include the development, implementation, and evaluation of a multicomponent, evidence-based intervention strategy in Canadian community pharmacies to demonstrate the impact pharmacists can have on the management of chronic pain and as one potential solution to helping curb the opioid crisis. Future studies should measure associated costs for such a program and any resulting cost-savings to the healthcare system.