Pharmacists in general practice: a qualitative process evaluation of the General Practice Pharmacist (GPP) study

Pharmacists' attitudes towards interprofessional collaboration to optimise medication use in older patients in Switzerland: a survey study

BACKGROUND

Collaboration between physicians and pharmacists facilitates the conduct of medication optimisation efforts. In the context of deprescribing, pharmacists' roles are often described as making deprescribing recommendations to physicians. Little is known about factors associated with pharmacists' willingness to make deprescribing recommendations and their interprofessional collaboration with physicians in Swiss primary care settings.

OBJECTIVE

To explore pharmacists' perspectives on medication optimisation and deprescribing in older adults, and their preferences for interprofessional collaboration in Swiss primary care settings.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, a random sample of 1000 pharmacist members of the Swiss Pharmacists Association pharmaSuisse was invited to participate in a survey on medication optimisation, deprescribing, and interprofessional collaboration. The survey contained three case vignettes of multimorbid patients with polypharmacy aged ≥ 80 years old, with different levels of dependency in activities in daily living (ADL) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). For each case vignette, pharmacists were asked if and which medications they would deprescribe. We calculated proportions of pharmacists' willingness to deprescribe by case vignette and performed a multilevel logistic regression to assess associations between CVD, ADL, and willingness to deprescribe.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight (14%) pharmacists responded to the survey: 113 (82%) were female, their mean age was 44 years (SD = 11), and 66% (n = 77) reported having never received any specific training on how to conduct structured medication reviews. Eighty-three (72%) pharmacists reported to be confident in identifying deprescribing opportunities. All pharmacists were willing to deprescribe ≥ 1 medication in all vignettes. Patients with CVD were at lower odds of having medications deprescribed (OR = 0.27, 95%CI 0.21 to 0.36). Willingness to deprescribe was lower with higher dependency in ADL (medium versus low dependency: OR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.54 to 0.87, high versus low dependency: OR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.56 to 0.91). However, the effect of dependency in ADL on willingness to deprescribe was significantly modified by the history of CVD. One hundred five pharmacists (97%) reported to interact with physicians to clarify questions regarding prescriptions at least once a week and 88 (81%) wished to be more involved in deprescribing and medication review.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists were willing to make deprescribing suggestions for older patients with polypharmacy, but two-thirds reported having received no formal training on how to perform structured medication reviews. Pharmacists would like to be more involved in the process of medication review and deprescribing, which should be leveraged in the context of Swiss primary care settings.

GPs' perceptions of pharmacists working in general practices: A mixed methods survey study

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists are increasingly incorporated into general practice teams globally and have been shown to positively impact patient outcomes. However, little research to date has focused on determining general practitioners' (GPs') perceptions of practice-based pharmacist roles in countries yet to establish such roles.

OBJECTIVES

To explore GPs' perceptions towards integrating pharmacists into practices and determine if any significant associations were present between GPs' perceptions and their demographic characteristics.

METHODS

In June 2022, a survey was disseminated to GPs in Ireland via post (n = 500 in Munster region), Twitter, WhatsApp, and an online GP support and education network. Quantitative data were captured through multiple option and Likert-scale questions and analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were captured via free-text boxes, with the open comments analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 152 valid responses were received (24.6% response to postal survey). Overall, GPs welcomed the role of practice-based pharmacists and perceived that they would increase patient safety. Most agreed with practice pharmacists providing medicine information (98%) vs. 23% agreeing with practice pharmacists prescribing independently. Most agreed they would partake in a practice pharmacist pilot (78.6%). The free-text comments described current pressures in general practice, existing relationships with pharmacists, funding and governance strategies, potential roles for pharmacists in general practice, and anticipated outcomes of such roles.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a deeper understanding of GPs' perceptions of integrating pharmacists into practices and the demographic characteristics associated with different perceptions, which may help better inform future initiatives to integrate pharmacists into practices.

Developing consensus on the principles and key actions for collaborative working between general practices and community pharmacies: a modified eDelphi study

OBJECTIVES

To develop consensus on the principles and key actions for collaborative working in practice between general practice, community pharmacy and patients and their carers.

DESIGN

Three-round modified eDelphi study, starting from an established conceptual model of collaboration between general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists.

SETTING

Community pharmacies and general practices in England, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

A panel of 123 experts: 43% from a community pharmacy background; 36% from a GP background; 13% patients, carers or patient representatives and 8% from academic or commissioner backgrounds. Panellist numbers reduced by approximately 30% in rounds 2 and 3.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Consensus between expert panellists, defined as at least 75% agreement.

RESULTS

A high level of consensus (>80%) was achieved on all components of a model of collaboration composed of Fundamental Principles of Collaboration and Key Activities for Action, supported by a series of aspirational statements and suggested practical actions. The fundamental principles and key activities are appended by contextual points. The findings indicate that collaboration in practice involves team members other than just GPs and community pharmacists and recognises that patients often want to know how each professional team is involved in their care. This study also provides insights into how collaboration between general practice and community pharmacy settings appears to have shifted during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially through opportunities for virtual collaboration and communication that can transcend the need for close geographical proximity.

CONCLUSION

A consensus-based model of collaboration between general practice teams, community pharmacy teams, and patients and their carers has been developed. It is practically focused, values the patient voice and incorporates general practice and community pharmacy team members. While developed in England, the model is likely to also have applicability to other countries with similar health systems that include general practices and community pharmacies.

GPs' and pharmacists' views of integrating pharmacists into general practices: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Practice-based pharmacists (PBPs) have been introduced into general practice across the UK to relieve some of the pressures within primary care. However, there is little existing UK literature that has explored healthcare professionals' (HCPs') views about PBP integration and how this role has evolved.

AIM

To explore the views and experiences of GPs, PBPs, and community pharmacists (CPs) about PBPs' integration into general practice and their impact on primary healthcare delivery.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative interview study in primary care in Northern Ireland.

METHOD

Purposive and snowball sampling were used to recruit triads (a GP, a PBP, and a CP) from across five administrative healthcare areas in Northern Ireland. Sampling of practices to recruit GPs and PBPs commenced in August 2020. These HCPs identified the CPs who had most contact with the general practices in which the recruited GPs and PBPs were working. Semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven triads were recruited from across the five administrative areas. Four main themes in relation to PBPs' integration into general practices were revealed: evolution of the role; PBP attributes; collaboration and communication; and impact on care. Areas for development were identified such as patient awareness of the PBP role. Many saw PBPs as a 'central hub-middleman' between general practice and community pharmacies.

CONCLUSION

Participants reported that PBPs had integrated well and perceived a positive impact on primary healthcare delivery. Further work is needed to increase patient awareness of the PBP role.

General practitioners' perceptions of pharmacists working in general practice: a qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists are being increasingly employed as part of general practice teams globally, and their input has been associated with several clinical and economic benefits. However, there is a paucity of research focussing on general practitioners' (GPs') perceptions of pharmacist integration into practices in countries where this novel role for pharmacists is yet to become commonplace.

OBJECTIVE

To explore GPs' perceptions of integrating pharmacists into general practices and to identify the behavioural determinants of GPs integrating pharmacists into practices.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted with GPs practising in Ireland, who were sampled using a combination of purposive, convenience, and snowball sampling. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, which then were analysed using conventional content analysis and directed content analysis employing the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

RESULTS

Seventeen GPs were interviewed between November 2021 and February 2022. Seven TDF domains were identified as predominant in influencing GPs' perceptions of pharmacist integration into general practices. These perceptions were mostly positive, especially regarding patient outcomes, cost savings, and improving access to care. However, there were concerns about funding the role, affecting others' workloads, and pharmacists' training needs to work in practices.

CONCLUSION

This study's theory-informed insight provides a deeper understanding of GPs' perceptions of pharmacists working in general practice and behaviours which can be targeted to help optimize integration. These findings should be utilized in future service development to preempt and address GPs' concerns ahead of pharmacist integration, as well as to inform the development of general practice-based pharmacist roles going forward.

Interventions to identify and manage depression delivered by 'nontraditional' providers to community-dwelling older adults: A realist review

BACKGROUND

Mental health problems experienced by older adults (60+ years of age) may remain hidden due to individual and system-level barriers. Opportunities to support early identification and management are therefore crucial. The National Health Service recommends wider public services that are embedded within local communities, but are not traditionally part of the healthcare landscape (i.e., 'nontraditional'), could facilitate engagement with healthcare by members of the public. Evidence for interventions involving Fire and Rescue, Police, Library services and postal workers, as nontraditional providers of mental health services, has not been synthesized previously. This review aims to understand how, why and in what contexts mental health interventions delivered by these nontraditional providers, to older adults, work.

METHODS

A realist review of interventions to identify and/or manage mental health problems (depression with or without anxiety) experienced by older adults. Systematic, cluster and iterative literature searches were conducted. Intervention evidence was appraised for rigour and explanatory relevance and then coded to inform context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs). A public advisory group supported our initial evidence search strategy and definition of key terms. This review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020212498).

RESULTS

Systematic searches revealed a dearth of evidence reporting mental health interventions delivered by nontraditional providers. Our scope was adjusted to consider interventions delivered by Fire and Police services only and for wider health and wellbeing concerns (e.g., dementia, falls prevention, mental health crises). Forty-three pieces of evidence were synthesized. Key themes included: legitimizing expanded roles, focusing on risk, intervention flexibility and organization integration; further subthemes are described. Themes map onto CMOCs and inform a preliminary programme theory. Findings were transposed to mental health contexts.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight challenges and opportunities for Fire and Police services, as nontraditional providers, to deliver interventions that identify and/or manage mental health problems among older adults. Our programme theory explains what could work, how, for whom and also by whom (i.e., which public services). Further empirical evidence is needed to test interventions, understand acceptability and inform implementation.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A public advisory group comprising older adults with lived experience of mental health problems and informal caregivers contributed to the original application, reviewed the scope and informed the approach to dissemination.

General practitioners' views of pharmacist services in general practice: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Pharmacist services in general practice are expanding worldwide, with evidence to show pharmacists' presence in general practice has financial, workload, and clinical benefits. Yet, little is known globally about general practitioners' (GPs') views on their presence in general practice.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the qualitative research evidence on GPs' views of pharmacist services in general practice.

METHODS

Qualitative evidence synthesis; 8 electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2021 for qualitative studies that reported the views of GPs regarding pharmacist services in general practice. Data from included studies were analyzed using thematic synthesis. The Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach was used to assess the confidence in individual review findings.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included, which captured the views of 159 GPs from 8 different countries. Four analytical themes describing the factors that should be considered in the development or optimization of pharmacist services in general practice, based on the views of GPs, were developed from the coded data and descriptive themes: (i) optimal environment for a pharmacist, (ii) the ideal pharmacist characteristics, (iii) complex stakeholder relationships, and (iv) benefits of an effective pharmacist.

CONCLUSION

Based on the synthesis of GPs' views, we have created a conceptual model of factors that should be considered by policymakers, GPs, pharmacists, and other relevant stakeholders when developing or optimizing pharmacist services in general practice going forward.

Systematic literature review of pharmacists in general practice in supporting the implementation of shared care agreements in primary care

BACKGROUND

Rising demand for healthcare continues to impact all sectors of the health service. As a result of the growing ageing population and the burden of chronic disease, healthcare has become more complex, and the need for more efficient management of specialist medication across the healthcare interface is of paramount importance. With the rising number of pharmacists working in primary care in clinical roles, is this a role that pharmacists could support to ensure the successful execution of shared care agreement (SCA) in primary care for these patients?

AIM OF THE REVIEW

Systematic review to identify activities and assess the interventions provided by pharmacists in primary care on SCA provision and how it affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for patients.

METHOD

Primary studies in English which tested the intervention or obtained views of stakeholders related to pharmacist input to shared care agreement within primary care were included. The following electronic databases were systematically searched from the date of inception to November 2021: AMED®, CINAHL®, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), EMBASE®, EMCARE®, Google Scholar, HMIC®, MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, Scopus and Web of Science®. Grey literature sources were also searched. The search was adapted according to the respective database-specific search tools. It was searched using a combination of Medical Subject Heading terms (MeSH), free-text search terms and Boolean operators.

RESULTS

A total of 5244 titles/abstracts were screened after duplicates were removed, and 64 full articles were assessed for eligibility. On examination of full text, no studies met the inclusion criteria for this review.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the need for further research to evaluate how pharmacists in general practice can support the safe and effective integration of specialist medication in primary care with the use of SCA.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

NIHR PROSPERO No: 2020 CRD42020165363 .

Pharmacists’ perceived role in supporting diabetes education and self-management in Ireland: a qualitative study

Background: Support for people with diabetes is necessary for optimal self-management. Structured diabetes education programmes fulfil this need, but attendance rates are consistently low. The role of pharmacists has expanded but the profession remains underutilised in chronic disease management. The objective of this study is to explore pharmacists’ perceived role in the support of diabetes education and self-management behaviours.

Methods: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of community pharmacists in Ireland was conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results: Ten pharmacists were interviewed. The four themes identified illustrate the juxtaposition of pharmacists’ potential in diabetes care with the realities of current pharmaceutical practice. One theme outlined the relationship between the person with diabetes and the pharmacist, ‘Patient or customer: the nature of the pharmacist relationship’. Two themes described the pharmacists’ role in supporting diabetes education and self-management, ‘Beyond medication: pharmacists’ current and potential role in diabetes management’ and ‘Need for diabetes education’. The final theme highlighted the barriers to a more engaged role in patient care, ‘Barriers: “all the stuff that gets in the way”’.

Conclusion: The relationship between pharmacists and people with diabetes could facilitate pharmacists in supporting diabetes self-management. However, variability across pharmacists’ level of involvement and consistent resource barriers were noted. Pharmacists were poorly informed about structured diabetes education programmes. Further research is needed to explore this variability but there may be potential to enhance the pharmacist role in promoting attendance at structured diabetes education programmes.

General practitioners' experiences with, views of, and attitudes towards, general practice-based pharmacists: a cross-sectional survey

Background

There is limited United Kingdom (UK) literature on general practice-based pharmacists’ (PBPs’) role evolution and few studies have explored general practitioners’ (GPs’) experiences on pharmacist integration into general practice. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate GPs’ experiences with, views of, and attitudes towards PBPs in Northern Ireland (NI).

Methods

A paper-based self-administered questionnaire comprising four sections was mailed in 2019 to 329 general practices across NI and was completed by one GP in every practice who had most contact with the PBP. Descriptive analyses were used and responses to open-ended questions were analysed thematically.

Results

The response rate was 61.7% (203/329). There was at least one PBP per general practice. All GPs had face-to-face meetings with PBPs, with three-quarters (78.7%, n = 159) meeting with the PBP more than once a week. Approximately two-thirds of GPs (62.4%, n = 126) reported that PBPs were qualified as independent prescribers, and 76.2% of these (n = 96/126) indicated that prescribers were currently prescribing for patients. The majority of GPs reported that PBPs always/very often had the required clinical skills (83.6%, n = 162) and knowledge (87.0%, n = 167) to provide safe and effective care for patients. However, 31.1% (n = 61) stated that PBPs only sometimes had the confidence to make clinical decisions. The majority of GPs (> 85%) displayed largely positive attitudes towards collaboration with PBPs. Most GPs agreed/strongly agreed that PBPs will have a positive impact on patient outcomes (95.0%, n = 192) and can provide a better link between general practices and community pharmacists (96.1%, n = 194). However, 24.8% of GPs (n = 50) were unclear if the PBP role moved community pharmacists to the periphery of the primary care team. An evaluation of the free-text comments indicated that GPs were in favour of more PBP sessions and full-time posts.

Conclusion

Most GPs had positive views of, and attitudes towards, PBPs. The findings may have implications for future developments in order to extend integration of PBPs within general practice, including the enhancement of training in clinical skills and decision-making. Exploring PBPs’, community pharmacists’ and patients’ views of this role in general practice is required to corroborate study findings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01607-5.

Pharmacists' perceived role in supporting diabetes education and self-management in Ireland: a qualitative study

Background: Support for people with diabetes is necessary for optimal self-management. Structured diabetes education programmes fulfil this need, but attendance rates are consistently low. The role of pharmacists has expanded but the profession remains underutilised in chronic disease management. The objective of this study is to explore pharmacists' perceived role in the support of diabetes education and self-management behaviours. Methods: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews of community pharmacists in Ireland was conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Ten pharmacists were interviewed. The four themes identified illustrate the juxtaposition of pharmacists' potential in diabetes care with the realities of current pharmaceutical practice. One theme outlined the relationship between the person with diabetes and the pharmacist, 'Patient or customer: the nature of the pharmacist relationship'. Two themes described the pharmacists' role in supporting diabetes education and self-management, 'Beyond medication: pharmacists' current and potential role in diabetes management' and 'Need for diabetes education'. The final theme highlighted the barriers to a more engaged role in patient care, 'Barriers: "all the stuff that gets in the way"'. Conclusion: The relationship between pharmacists and people with diabetes could facilitate pharmacists in supporting diabetes self-management. However, variability across pharmacists' level of involvement and consistent resource barriers were noted. Pharmacists were poorly informed about structured diabetes education programmes. Further research is needed to explore this variability but there may be potential to enhance the pharmacist role in promoting attendance at structured diabetes education programmes.

Integrating clinical pharmacists within general practice: protocol for a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Managing patients with multiple conditions (multimorbidity) is a major challenge for healthcare systems internationally, particularly in older patients. Multimorbidity and subsequent polypharmacy increase treatment burden and the risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing, and both are complex to manage in primary care. Limited evidence suggests integration of pharmacists into general practice teams could improve medication management for patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Building on findings from a non-randomised, uncontrolled General Practice Pharmacist (GPP) feasibility study conducted in Irish primary care, the aim of this study is to conduct a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) of the GPP study, to assess feasibility, intervention impact, costs and appropriateness of continuing to a definitive cRCT.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This pilot cRCT will involve 8 general practitioner (GP) practices and 120 patients. Practices will identify and recruit patients aged ≥65 years, who are taking ≥10 regular medications. Practices will be allocated to intervention or control after baseline data collection. Intervention practices will have a pharmacist integrated within their service, working with GPs, patients and practice staff to optimise prescribing and other medication-related activities. Control practices will provide standard GP care. The primary feasibility outcomes will include recruitment rate, uptake of medication reviews and study retention. For the primary clinical outcome, the number of potentially inappropriate prescribing incidences per patient will be collected. Secondary outcomes will include medication-related outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures, and data pertaining to the role and impact of the pharmacist on prescribing. In addition, economic and process evaluations will be conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial has been approved by the Irish College of General Practitioners Research Ethics Committee and will be performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals and be presented at national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN Registry (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18752158).