Effectiveness of a community based nurse-pharmacist managed pain clinic: A mixed-methods study

Characterising pharmacists' interventions in chronic non-cancer pain care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Chronic non-cancer pain may affect up to 51% of the general population. Pharmacist interventions have shown promise in enhancing patient safety and outcomes. However, our understanding of the scope of pharmacists' interventions remains incomplete.

AIM

Our goal was to characterise pharmacists' interventions for the management of chronic non-cancer pain.

METHOD

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO databases and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. Abstracts and full texts were independently screened by two reviewers. Data were extracted by one reviewer, and validated by the second. Outcomes of studies were charted using the dimensions of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT).

RESULTS

Forty-eight reports were included. Interventions ensuring appropriate drug prescription occurred in 37 (79%) studies. Patient education and healthcare professional education were reported in 28 (60%) and 5 (11%) studies, respectively. Therapy monitoring occurred in 17 (36%) studies. Interventions regularly involved interprofessional collaboration. A median of 75% of reported outcome domains improved due to pharmacist interventions, especially patient disposition (adherence), medication safety and satisfaction with therapy.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists' interventions enhanced the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Underreported outcome domains and interventions, such as medication management, merit further investigation.

Nurse-led clinics in primary health care: A scoping review of contemporary definitions, implementation enablers and barriers and their health impact

AIMS

To define nurse-led clinics in primary health care, identify barriers and enablers that influence their successful implementation, and understand what impact they have on patient and population health outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Nurse-led clinics definitions remain inconsistent. There is limited understanding regarding what enablers and barriers impact successful nurse-led clinic implementation and their impact on patient health care.

DESIGN

Scoping review using narrative synthesis.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched to identify nurse-led clinic definitions and models of care between 2000 and 2023. Screening and selection of studies were based on eligibility criteria and methodological quality assessment. Narrative synthesis enabled to communicate the phenomena of interest and follows the PRISMA for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

RESULTS

Among the 36 identified studies, key principles of what constitutes nurse-led clinics were articulated providing a robust definition. Nurse-led clinics are, in most cases, commensurate with standard care, however, they provide more time with patients leading to greater satisfaction. Enablers highlight nurse-led clinic success is achieved through champions, partners, systems, and clear processes, while barriers encompass key risk points and sustainability considerations.

CONCLUSION

The review highlights several fundamental elements are central to nurse-led clinic success and are highly recommended when developing interventional nurse-led strategies. Nurse-led clinics within primary health care seek to address health care through community driven, health professional and policy supported strategies. Overall, a robust and contemporary definition of nurse-led care and the clinics in which they operate is provided.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The comprehensive definition, clear mediators of success and the health impact of nurse-led clinics provide a clear framework to effectively build greater capacity among nursing services within primary health care. This, in addition, highlights the need for good health care policy to ensure sustainability.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No Patient or Public Contribution.

DEA-registered clinical pharmacist practitioners: Progressing practice to increase patient care access

PURPOSE

This descriptive review aims to describe the impact of controlled substance prescriptive authority (CSPA) among Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)-registered clinical pharmacist practitioners (pharmacists) within the Veterans Health Administration (VA). The practice perspectives of pharmacists with CSPA are also reviewed. A 3-part methodology included identification and query of DEA-registered pharmacists, practice impact data analysis, and time and motion prescribing analysis.

SUMMARY

Between quarter 1 of fiscal year 2018 and quarter 2 of fiscal year 2022, the number of DEA-registered pharmacists in the VA grew by 314%, from 21 to 87 pharmacists. Pharmacists in pain management and mental health reported benefits of CSPA, with the most common being practice autonomy (93%), increased efficiency (92%), and reduced burden on other prescribers (89%). Initial challenges to pharmacists obtaining DEA registration included a lack of incentive (46%) and concern about increased liability (37%). A time and motion analysis demonstrated that pharmacists with CSPA saved a median of 12 minutes for prescription writing compared to those without CSPA.

CONCLUSION

There is an opportunity for DEA-registered pharmacists to meet patient care needs to fill gaps in care from physician shortages, improve health equity, and provide quality healthcare for vulnerable, underserved populations, especially in areas where controlled substance prescribing is common. To fully optimize the role of the pharmacist, it is imperative that state practice acts be expanded to include pharmacist DEA authority as part of collaborative practice and that fair and equitable payment models be established for pharmacist comprehensive medication management.

Nurse-Led Telephone Follow-Up Intervention for Titrating and Tapering Opioids in Chronic Pain Patients - A Feasibility Study

Background and Purpose

Opioids in chronic non-cancer pain are debated, but remain a part of the pain treatment for selected patients. Research is scarce on the relieving and adverse effects of opioids, and how to deliver opioid treatment in this patient group. This study's purpose was to assess the feasibility of a nurse-led telephone follow-up intervention for titrating or tapering opioids, including a pilot study of the intervention outcomes.

Patients and Methods

The feasibility assessment and process evaluation were performed according to the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for evaluating complex interventions. A pilot study of the intervention outcomes was also performed. With a retrospective, descriptive, and longitudinal approach, we analyzed reports from 32 patients who titrated or tapered opioids. Information on demography, sleep satisfaction, health status, pain intensity/bothersomeness, opioid doses, and side effects was derived from the Oslo Pain Registry. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and chi-square tests were used to analyze registry data.

Results

The study findings indicate that the intervention is feasible. Areas of impact were lack of a sound theory basis, unclear allocation criteria, and inconsistent and non-validated measurement tools. Mechanisms of change were interprofessional collaboration, nurses' knowledge and competencies, predictability, and availability. Statistical analyses showed no between-groups differences in demographical-, clinical-, and pain characteristics, except those who titrated opioids were significantly older than patients tapering opioids (P=0.010). All patients reported poor health and side effects at baseline. Those who tapered opioids had a significant reduction in opioid use (P=0.004). Titrating opioids was associated with a significant increase in side effects (P=0.038).

Conclusion

Considering the limitations and the strengths of the intervention, the present study indicates that the nurse-led telephone follow-up program is a feasible intervention. With the right adjustments and improvements, the intervention is eligible for a larger efficacy study.

Nurse-pharmacist collaborations for promoting medication safety among community-dwelling adults: A scoping review

Background

Despite good evidence that supports improved clinical health outcomes and the cost effectiveness of nurse-pharmacist collaboration for promoting medication safety among adults in acute care settings, there is limited research in community settings.

Objective

This scoping review examines, maps, and identifies gaps in the existing literature on nurse-pharmacist collaboration to augment medication safety among community-dwelling adults.

Design

Setting(s): Community setting.

Participants

This review consists of 3,464 participants across 23 studies.

Methods

We used the enhanced Arksey and O'Malley framework by Levac and colleagues. Studies from MEDLINE, CINAHL, ProQuest, Scopus, and PubMed databases implementing medication safety through nurse-pharmacist collaboration for community-dwelling adults were included. We extracted data according to country of origin, intervention, and relevance to the current review.

Results

Twenty-three studies were included in this review. Nurse-pharmacist collaborations in community settings are still evolving and are in a nascent form. Five sub-themes emerged from literature review of collaboration between nurses and pharmacists in community settings for medication safety. They are creating new opportunities to address gaps in community medication safety, enabling complementary interprofessional roles in medication safety, facilitating of efficient and cost-effective measures for medication safety, diverse nature of assessments done by nurses and pharmacists, and incohesive teams due to poor collaborative practices.

Conclusions

Nurse-pharmacist collaborations in community settings improved disease management, prevented adverse drug events, and reduced hospitalizations. They resulted in early identification and correction of medication safety related issues, reduced wait periods to see general practitioners, and enhanced chronic disease self-management skills among community-dwelling adults. There is a need to improve existing systems and policies through research for sustaining such collaborations especially in community settings.

Evaluating Outcomes of a Pharmacist-Driven Pain Management Consult Service

The opioid crisis continues to place a significant burden on American families and the healthcare system. To date, there is an evolving body of evidence demonstrating that pharmacists can positively impact patient care in the pain management specialty. The purpose of this study is to evaluate 24-hour average pain scores before and after a clinical pharmacist completes a physician-ordered pain consult in a community hospital setting. For the primary outcome, there was a statistically significant reduction in pain scores 48 hours post consult (6.5 vs. 5.2; p < 0.001; Table 3) and 24 hours prior to discharge (6.1 vs. 4.5; p < 0.001; Table 3) when compared to pain scores 24 hours prior to consult. Additionally, there was a statistically significant reduction in the number of morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) at 48 hours post consult (149.4 vs. 133.8; p < 0.001; Table 4) and 24 hours prior to discharge (136.5 vs. 100.6; p < 0.001; Table 4) when compared to 24 hours prior to consult. This pharmacist-driven pain consult service demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in pain scores while simultaneously reducing MME utilization and the number of opioids ordered, using a multimodal evidence-driven approach to pain management in a community hospital.

Practical utility of mixed methods research in pharmacy practice

PURPOSE

Our aim was to review key methodological concepts and provide a practical guide to employing mixed methods research to enhance pharmacy practice research.

SUMMARY

Mixed methods research provides multiple organized analytic perspectives to thoroughly investigate complex social and scientific problems in a methodologically rigorous manner. This research design incorporates collection and analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data components to create a thorough understanding of a complex question. The 5 most commonly identified reasons for conducting mixed methods research include triangulation, complementarity, development, initiation, and expansion of results. For research questions that benefit from mixed methods research, we review how to structure the study, including timing, sequencing, and prioritization of methods. Illustrative examples from the literature highlight the utility of this methodology for clinical and operational pharmacy research questions.

CONCLUSION

Mixed methods designs can enhance pharmacy research inquiry, provide a means to understand complicated issues, and uncover optimal interventions.

Best practices for conducting and writing mixed methods research in social pharmacy

Mixed method approaches are increasingly being used in social pharmacy research due to its potential to uncover insights that are not possible with separate quantitative and qualitative studies. Despite their increasing use, there are some limitations in these publications. Typically, specific mixed method designs are not chosen, quantitative and qualitative data are not systematically integrated, and the credibility or validity of the approach is not addressed. In this paper, we discuss mixed method designs and their applications in social pharmacy. Different integration techniques and legitimation types are detailed. We describe new methodological developments and provide examples from recent mixed method studies in social pharmacy. Finally, we also provide recommendations for planning, conducting, reporting, and evaluating mixed method studies. We suggest that researchers interested in conducting mixed method studies follow recommended guidelines and obtain training in mixed methods to ensure that rigorous mixed method studies are conducted in social and administrative pharmacy.

Patient and public perception and experience of community pharmacy services post-discharge in the UK: a rapid review and qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the perception and experience of patients and the public (PP) about community pharmacy (CP) services and other primary care services after hospital discharge back home.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A rapid review and qualitative study exploring PP perceptions of primary care, focusing on CP services in the UK.

METHODS

A mixed-methods approach was adopted including a rapid review undertaken between 24 April and 8 May 2019 across four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL). Semistructured interviews were then conducted investigating for shifts in current PP perception, but also nuanced opinion pertaining to CP services. A convenience sampling technique was used through two online PP groups for recruitment. Thematic framework analysis was applied to interview transcripts.

PARTICIPANTS

Any consenting adults ≥18 years old were invited regardless of their medical condition, and whether they had used post-discharge services or not.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. Patients were generally supportive and satisfied with primary care services. However, some barriers to the use of these services included: resource limitations; poor communication between healthcare providers or between patient and healthcare providers; and patients' lack of awareness of available services. From the 11 interviewees, there was a lack of awareness of CP post-discharge services. Nevertheless, there was general appreciation of the benefit of CP services to patients, professionals and wider healthcare system. Potential barriers to uptake and use included: accessibility, resource availability, lack of awareness, and privacy and confidentiality issues related to information-sharing. Several participants felt the uptake of such services should be improved.

CONCLUSION

There was alignment between the review and qualitative study about high patient acceptance, appreciation and satisfaction with primary care services post-discharge. Barriers to the use of CP post-discharge services identified from interviews resonated with the existing literature; this is despite developments in pharmacy practice in recent times towards clinical and public health services.

Role of pharmacists in optimising opioid therapy for chronic non-malignant pain; A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Opioid optimisation is a global issue in Chronic Non-malignant Pain (CNMP) management.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness of interventions delivered by pharmacists in outpatient clinical settings, community pharmacies and primary care services in optimising opioid therapy for people with CNMP and to explore stakeholders' opinions about role of pharmacists in optimising opioid therapy.

METHODS

We conducted searches in PubMed, CINAHL, Psych Info, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and Conference Proceedings and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts. All studies where pharmacists in outpatient clinical settings, community pharmacies and patient care services helped in optimisation of opioids in the treatment of CNMP as individuals or part of a team were included. Authors followed the 27-item PRISMA guidelines and the review was registered in PROSPERO. All authors were involved in screening and selection of studies and included studies between January 1990-June 2020. Studies not published in English language and participants with cancer pain were excluded. All the included studies were descriptively synthesized.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the final data synthesis of this review and the total number of participants in all studies was 1175. Interventions by pharmacists were successful in decreasing opioid dose in 4 studies and improved patient opioid safety in 5 studies. Stakeholders considered that the role of pharmacists in optimisation of opioid therapy for people with CNMP can be promising and should be further developed.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review gives an overview of pharmacist intervention feasibility, stakeholders' opinions and possible benefits on opioid optimisation in people with CNMP in outpatient clinical settings, community pharmacies and primary care settings. However, further research is warranted, which can guide the development of new policies and guidelines for the utilisation of pharmacists to promote opioid safety in people using prescription opioids for CNMP management.

Behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: systematic reviews and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

The term 'medically unexplained symptoms' is used to cover a wide range of persistent bodily complaints for which adequate examination and appropriate investigations do not reveal sufficiently explanatory structural or other specified pathologies. A wide range of interventions may be delivered to patients presenting with medically unexplained symptoms in primary care. Many of these therapies aim to change the behaviours of the individual who may have worsening symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

An evidence synthesis to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms delivered in primary care settings was undertaken. Barriers to and facilitators of the effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions from the perspective of patients and service providers were evaluated through qualitative review and realist synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Full search strategies were developed to identify relevant literature. Eleven electronic sources were searched. Eligibility criteria - for the review of clinical effectiveness, randomised controlled trials were sought. For the qualitative review, UK studies of any design were included. For the cost-effectiveness review, papers were restricted to UK studies reporting outcomes as quality-adjusted life-year gains. Clinical searches were conducted in November 2015 and December 2015, qualitative searches were conducted in July 2016 and economic searches were conducted in August 2016. The databases searched included MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO and EMBASE. Updated searches were conducted in February 2019 and March 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult participants meeting the criteria for medically unexplained symptoms, including somatoform disorders, chronic unexplained pain and functional somatic syndromes.

INTERVENTIONS

Behavioural interventions were categorised into types. These included psychotherapies, exercise-based interventions, multimodal therapies (consisting of more than one intervention type), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support, guided self-help and general practitioner interventions, such as reattribution. Evidence synthesis: a network meta-analysis was conducted to allow a simultaneous comparison of all evaluated interventions in a single coherent analysis. Separate network meta-analyses were performed at three time points: end of treatment, short-term follow-up (< 6 months since the end of treatment) and long-term follow-up (≥ 6 months after the end of treatment). Outcomes included physical and psychological symptoms, physical functioning and impact of the illness on daily activities. Economic evaluation: within-trial estimates of cost-effectiveness were generated for the subset of studies where utility values (or quality-adjusted life-years) were reported or where these could be estimated by mapping from Short Form questionnaire-36 items or Short Form questionnaire-12 items outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies involving 9077 patients were included in the clinical effectiveness review. There was a large degree of heterogeneity both between and within intervention types, and the networks were sparse across all outcomes. At the end of treatment, behavioural interventions showed some beneficial effects when compared with usual care, in particular for improvement of specific physical symptoms [(1) pain: high-intensity cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBTHI) standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.54 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.28 to 0.84], multimodal SMD 0.52 (95% CrI 0.19 to 0.89); and (2) fatigue: low-intensity cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBTLI) SMD 0.72 (95% CrI 0.27 to 1.21), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.87 (95% CrI 0.20 to 1.55), graded activity SMD 0.51 (95% CrI 0.14 to 0.93), multimodal SMD 0.52 (95% CrI 0.14 to 0.92)] and psychological outcomes [(1) anxiety CBTHI SMD 0.52 (95% CrI 0.06 to 0.96); (2) depression CBTHI SMD 0.80 (95% CrI 0.26 to 1.38); and (3) emotional distress other psychotherapy SMD 0.58 (95% CrI 0.05 to 1.13), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.66 (95% CrI 0.18 to 1.28) and sport/exercise SMD 0.49 (95% CrI 0.03 to 1.01)]. At short-term follow-up, behavioural interventions showed some beneficial effects for specific physical symptoms [(1) pain: CBTHI SMD 0.73 (95% CrI 0.10 to 1.39); (2) fatigue: CBTLI SMD 0.62 (95% CrI 0.11 to 1.14), relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.51 (95% CrI 0.06 to 1.00)] and psychological outcomes [(1) anxiety: CBTHI SMD 0.74 (95% CrI 0.14 to 1.34); (2) depression: CBTHI SMD 0.93 (95% CrI 0.37 to 1.52); and (3) emotional distress: relaxation/stretching/social support/emotional support SMD 0.82 (95% CrI 0.02 to 1.65), multimodal SMD 0.43 (95% CrI 0.04 to 0.91)]. For physical functioning, only multimodal therapy showed beneficial effects: end-of-treatment SMD 0.33 (95% CrI 0.09 to 0.59); and short-term follow-up SMD 0.78 (95% CrI 0.23 to 1.40). For impact on daily activities, CBTHI was the only behavioural intervention to show beneficial effects [end-of-treatment SMD 1.30 (95% CrI 0.59 to 2.00); and short-term follow-up SMD 2.25 (95% CrI 1.34 to 3.16)]. Few effects remained at long-term follow-up. General practitioner interventions showed no significant beneficial effects for any outcome. No intervention group showed conclusive beneficial effects for measures of symptom load (somatisation). A large degree of heterogeneity was found across individual studies in the assessment of cost-effectiveness. Several studies suggested that the interventions produce fewer quality-adjusted life-years than usual care. For those interventions that generated quality-adjusted life-year gains, the mid-point incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from £1397 to £129,267, but, where the mid-point ICER fell below £30,000, the exploratory assessment of uncertainty suggested that it may be above £30,000.

LIMITATIONS

Sparse networks meant that it was not possible to conduct a metaregression to explain between-study differences in effects. Results were not consistent within intervention type, and there were considerable differences in characteristics between studies of the same type. There were moderate to high levels of statistical heterogeneity. Separate analyses were conducted for three time points and, therefore, analyses are not repeated-measures analyses and do not account for correlations between time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural interventions showed some beneficial effects for specific medically unexplained symptoms, but no one behavioural intervention was effective across all medically unexplained symptoms. There was little evidence that these interventions are effective for measures of symptom load (somatisation). General practitioner-led interventions were not shown to be effective. Considerable heterogeneity in interventions, populations and sparse networks mean that results should be interpreted with caution. The relationship between patient and service provider is perceived to play a key role in facilitating a successful intervention. Future research should focus on testing the therapeutic effects of the general practitioner-patient relationship within trials of behavioural interventions, and explaining the observed between-study differences in effects within the same intervention type (e.g. with more detailed reporting of defined mechanisms of the interventions under study).

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015025520.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 46. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of doctor-nurse substitution strategies in primary care: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Having nurses take on tasks that are typically conducted by doctors (doctor-nurse substitution, a form of 'task-shifting') may help to address doctor shortages and reduce doctors' workload and human resource costs. A Cochrane Review of effectiveness studies suggested that nurse-led care probably leads to similar healthcare outcomes as care delivered by doctors. This finding highlights the need to explore the factors that affect the implementation of strategies to substitute doctors with nurses in primary care. In our qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), we focused on studies of nurses taking on tasks that are typically conducted by doctors working in primary care, including substituting doctors with nurses or expanding nurses' roles.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To identify factors influencing implementation of interventions to substitute doctors with nurses in primary care. (2) To explore how our synthesis findings related to, and helped to explain, the findings of the Cochrane intervention review of the effectiveness of substituting doctors with nurses. (3) To identify hypotheses for subgroup analyses for future updates of the Cochrane intervention review.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CINAHL and PubMed, contacted experts in the field, scanned the reference lists of relevant studies and conducted forward citation searches for key articles in the Social Science Citation Index and Science Citation Index databases, and 'related article' searches in PubMed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We constructed a maximum variation sample (exploring variables such as country level of development, aspects of care covered and the types of participants) from studies that had collected and analysed qualitative data related to the factors influencing implementation of doctor-nurse substitution and the expansion of nurses' tasks in community or primary care worldwide. We included perspectives of doctors, nurses, patients and their families/carers, policymakers, programme managers, other health workers and any others directly involved in or affected by the substitution. We excluded studies that collected data using qualitative methods but did not analyse the data qualitatively.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We identified factors influencing implementation of doctor-nurse substitution strategies using a framework thematic synthesis approach. Two review authors independently assessed the methodological strengths and limitations of included studies using a modified Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool. We assessed confidence in the evidence for the QES findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. We integrated our findings with the evidence from the effectiveness review of doctor-nurse substitution using a matrix model. Finally, we identified hypotheses for subgroup analyses for updates of the review of effectiveness.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 66 studies (69 papers), 11 from low- or middle-income countries and 55 from high-income countries. These studies found several factors that appeared to influence the implementation of doctor-nurse substitution strategies. The following factors were based on findings that we assessed as moderate or high confidence.Patients in many studies knew little about nurses' roles and the difference between nurse-led and doctor-led care. They also had mixed views about the type of tasks that nurses should deliver. They preferred doctors when the tasks were more 'medical' but accepted nurses for preventive care and follow-ups. Doctors in most studies also preferred that nurses performed only 'non-medical' tasks. Nurses were comfortable with, and believed they were competent to deliver a wide range of tasks, but particularly emphasised tasks that were more health promotive/preventive in nature.Patients in most studies thought that nurses were more easily accessible than doctors. Doctors and nurses also saw nurse-doctor substitution and collaboration as a way of increasing people's access to care, and improving the quality and continuity of care.Nurses thought that close doctor-nurse relationships and doctor's trust in and acceptance of nurses was important for shaping their roles. But nurses working alone sometimes found it difficult to communicate with doctors.Nurses felt they had gained new skills when taking on new tasks. But nurses wanted more and better training. They thought this would increase their skills, job satisfaction and motivation, and would make them more independent.Nurses taking on doctors' tasks saw this as an opportunity to develop personally, to gain more respect and to improve the quality of care they could offer to patients. Better working conditions and financial incentives also motivated nurses to take on new tasks. Doctors valued collaborating with nurses when this reduced their own workload.Doctors and nurses pointed to the importance of having access to resources, such as enough staff, equipment and supplies; good referral systems; experienced leaders; clear roles; and adequate training and supervision. But they often had problems with these issues. They also pointed to the huge number of documents they needed to complete when tasks were moved from doctors to nurses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patients, doctors and nurses may accept the use of nurses to deliver services that are usually delivered by doctors. But this is likely to depend on the type of services. Nurses taking on extra tasks want respect and collaboration from doctors; as well as proper resources; good referral systems; experienced leaders; clear roles; and adequate incentives, training and supervision. However, these needs are not always met.

Impact of Chronic Pain on Patients' Quality of Life: A Comparative Mixed-Methods Study

Background:

Chronic pain has become a common problem within primary care and can negatively impact patients’ lives.

Objective:

To assess and explore the impact of chronic pain on patients’ quality of life (QoL) using quantitative and qualitative data, respectively.

Methods:

A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was used. Chronic pain patients were recruited from a community-based pain clinic located in the North of England. Quality of life was assessed using Short-Form 36 version 2. Quality of life data were also extracted from the Third Oxford and Lifestyles Survey and Welsh Health Survey to allow comparison of QoL of chronic pain patients with that of the general population and patients with long-term conditions. Qualitative interviews were conducted face-to-face using a semistructured topic guide. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS version 24 and qualitative data were analyzed thematically.

Results:

Seventy-nine patients participated in the quantitative phase. The mean (standard deviation) age was 46.5 (14.5). Lower back (54; 68.3%) followed by lower limb were the most common pain sites. Compared with the general population and patients with long-term conditions, chronic pain patients had significantly lower mean QoL scores across all domains of SF-36 (All P < .05). Six themes emerged from qualitative data: interference with physical functioning, interference with professional life, interference with relationships and family life, interference with social life, interference with sleep, and interference with mood.

Conclusion:

The multidimensional negative impact of chronic pain leads to poorer QoL among patients with chronic pain compared to the general population and patients with other long-term conditions.

'Treated as a number, not treated as a person': a qualitative exploration of the perceived barriers to effective pain management of patients with chronic pain

OBJECTIVES

To identify barriers to effective pain management encountered by patients with chronic pain within the UK's National Health Service (NHS).

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of face-to-face, semistructured qualitative interviews using thematic analysis.

SETTING

A community-based chronic pain clinic jointly managed by a nurse and pharmacist located in the North of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Nineteen adult (>18 years) patients with chronic pain discharged from a pain clinic, with the ability to understand and speak the English language.

RESULTS

In general, patients were highly disappointed with the quality of pain management services provided both within primary and secondary care, and consequently were willing to seek private medical care. Barriers to effective pain management were divided into two main themes: healthcare professional-related and health systems-related. Three subthemes emerged under healthcare professionals-related barriers, namely (1) healthcare professionals' lack of interest and empathy, (2) general practitioners' (GP) lack of specialised knowledge in pain management and (3) lack of communication between healthcare professionals. Three subthemes emerged under health system-related barriers: (1) long waiting time for appointments in secondary care, (2) short consultation times with GPs and (3) lack of an integrated multidisciplinary approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients expressed a clear desire for the improved provision and quality of chronic pain management services within the NHS to overcome barriers identified in this study. An integrated holistic approach based on a biopsychosocial model is required to effectively manage pain and improve patient satisfaction. Future research should explore the feasibility, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of integrated care delivery models for chronic pain management within primary care.

Applications of mixed-methods methodology in clinical pharmacy research

Introduction Mixed-methods methodology, as the name suggests refers to mixing of elements of both qualitative and quantitative methodologies in a single study. In the past decade, mixed-methods methodology has gained popularity among healthcare researchers as it promises to bring together the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches. Methodology A number of mixed-methods designs are available in the literature and the four most commonly used designs in healthcare research are: the convergent parallel design, the embedded design, the exploratory design, and the explanatory design. Each has its own unique advantages, challenges and procedures and selection of a particular design should be guided by the research question. Guidance on designing, conducting and reporting mixed-methods research is available in the literature, so it is advisable to adhere to this to ensure methodological rigour. When to use it is best suited when the research questions require: triangulating findings from different methodologies to explain a single phenomenon; clarifying the results of one method using another method; informing the design of one method based on the findings of another method, development of a scale/questionnaire and answering different research questions within a single study. Two case studies have been presented to illustrate possible applications of mixed-methods methodology. Limitations Possessing the necessary knowledge and skills to undertake qualitative and quantitative data collection, analysis, interpretation and integration remains the biggest challenge for researchers conducting mixed-methods studies. Sequential study designs are often time consuming, being in two (or more) phases whereas concurrent study designs may require more than one data collector to collect both qualitative and quantitative data at the same time.

The impact of a creative play intervention on satisfaction with nursing care: A mixed-methods study

PURPOSE

Hospitalisation can lead to distress for children. Creative play may reduce the adverse effects of hospitalisation on children, as it could lead to children associating satisfaction and fun with their hospital experience. The aim of the current study is to investigate the impact of a creative play intervention on service-care satisfaction measurements of children and their parents.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A mixed-methods design consisting of quantitative pre/post-assessments and qualitative interviews was used within this study. The research was conducted with 30 children (n_{experimental group} = 15; n_{control group =} 15). Their parents (n = 30) and their nurse practitioners (n = 20) were also contacted in order to capture their reflections of this intervention which included creative activities with unused clean medical materials. Child participants completed the Patient's Nursing Care Perception Tool and their parents completed the PedsQL Health Care Satisfaction Tool.

RESULTS

The two groups did not differ in relation to the Patients' Nursing Care Satisfaction Tool (PNCST) (t(28): 0.348, p = .730) and the PedsQL (t(28): -0.189, p = .852) scores at Time 1 before the intervention; however, significant differences were observed at the end at Time 2 (PNCST: t(28): -11.63, p < .001; PedsQL: t(28): -12.416, p < .001). In qualitative interviews, nurses indicated that their play skills with children had been enhanced by this intervention. Family attendants reported that the intervention improved the nurse-child relationship and their satisfaction with care.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The results have shown that creative play intervention are a feasible nursing intervention which has a strong potential to be effective on child patients' and their attendants' satisfaction with care services.

The future of pain pharmacy: driven by need

Background

Opioid prescribing has increased by ~400% over the past 20 years in the US and has been correlated with dramatic increases in accidental overdose-related deaths. Emerging evidence of serious dose-dependent side effects of opioid analgesics has led to recommendations from multinational pain societies and governments to decrease opioid doses and increase referrals to pain specialists. Demand for pain specialists of all types has increased; however, training programs for health care professionals struggle to satisfy this need.

Objective

The purpose of this article is to highlight the role of clinical pharmacy specialists in pain management and to discuss available residency training programs and subspecialties within each program.

Methods

We surveyed all eleven accredited pharmacy postgraduate year two (PGY-2) Pain and Palliative Care Residency programs in the US. Program information was derived from interviews with residency directors, current residents, program brochures, and residency Web sites. Data collected included core, elective, and longitudinal rotations, with the time frame dedicated to each experience. Primary practice areas, as well as inpatient vs outpatient focus, were also documented. Additionally, a review of the available literature was completed to determine the areas in greatest need for future pain specialists.

Results

Pharmacy pain specialists have been referenced as highly effective additions to interdisciplinary pain management teams. Pharmacists provide expertise in complex pain medication management, which remains the primary focus of most chronic pain encounters. The PGY-2 programs surveyed differ considerably, with the majority providing significant emphasis to either acute pain management or palliative care with brief or limited exposure to chronic pain management. Four of the eleven programs require 2 months of chronic pain management; however, only two of the eleven programs identify chronic pain management as a primary practice setting.

Discussion

Pain specialists in all fields are in high demand; however, the need for health care professionals specialized in chronic pain management probably exceeds that for professionals specialized in acute pain management and palliative care combined. This disparity between disease prevalence and specialty training programs is not reflected in the current residency training structure, nor have additional training programs arisen to fill this critical need.

Conclusion

Health care systems will continue to struggle to meet the demands of patients with chronic pain until significant emphasis is placed on the education and training of health care professionals in this area. Clinical pharmacy should aim to meet this demand through the expansion of PGY-2 training programs and improved didactic education in pharmacy school that reflects the increased need for chronic pain specialists.