Solicitations in GP, nurse and pharmacist prescriber consultations: an observational study

Implementing a newly prescribed cardiovascular medicine in daily routine: The patient perspective at readmission to primary care

BACKGROUND

Readmission to primary care is challenging for patients due to involvement of multiple healthcare providers across different settings and implementing new medicines into their daily routine. Elucidating patients' needs is crucial to tailor counseling support.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the patient perspectives on implementing a newly prescribed cardiovascular medicine into their daily routine at readmission to primary care.

METHODS

A qualitative study was performed within the outpatient pharmacy. Adult patients who were prescribed a new cardiovascular medicine by their treating hospital physician at hospital discharge or during an outpatient clinic visit were eligible to participate. Purposive sampling was applied to equally distribute adherence-influencing factors. Patients were interviewed by telephone and inclusion continued until theoretical data saturation. An adapted Greenhalgh framework for implementation research was used for a thematic content analysis by conceptualizing the new medicine as an innovation that requires implementation by a patient (adopter).

RESULTS

Data saturation was reached at 44 patients of which 19 discontinued their new medicine at the time of the interview. Reasons for discontinuing included: side-effects, insufficient efficacy or negligence. Patients considered a lack of basic knowledge on their newly prescribed cardiovascular medicine as a major barrier for adopting it into their daily routine. They were in need of information on risks and benefits of their new medicine. A noticeable effect and tailored counseling facilitated patients in taking their medicine as prescribed. Patients mentioned personalized organizing tools and routinization of medication intake as important success factors for addressing their practical challenges with their new medicine.

CONCLUSIONS

By applying the adapted Greenhalgh framework, this study provided a unique and structured insight in patients' barriers and facilitators that could influence their ability to implement a new cardiovascular medicine at readmission to primary care. This knowledge enables pharmacists to tailor their patient support and provide individualized patient counseling.

Patient-pharmacist communication during a post-discharge pharmacist home visit

Background With the shifting role of community pharmacists towards patient education and counselling, they are well-positioned to conduct a post-discharge home visit which could prevent or solve drug-related problems. Gaining insight into the communication during these home visits could be valuable for optimizing and consequently improving patient safety at readmission to primary care. Objective To assess patient-pharmacist communication during a post-discharge home visit. Setting The homes of patients recently discharged from a single general hospital in the Netherlands. Methods Pharmacists used a semi-structured protocol to guide the consultations and audiorecorded them. Sixty audio-recordings were included for a qualitative analysis in this study with the help of NVivo version 11 software. Main outcome measure (1) Initiator and topics under discussion. (2) Frequency of discussion of topics as per coded in themes and subthemes. Results Issues regarding the administration and use of medication, e.g. regimen and actual drug-taking issues, knowledge gaps regarding their medication and patients’ health were discussed most frequently, followed by medication logistics and medication effectiveness. Patients’ beliefs about their medication and adherence were less frequently discussed. The pharmacist initiated the majority of these topics. Additional non-protocolled topics were scarce and consisted mainly of patient-initiated dissatisfaction regarding the community pharmacy or health insurers. Conclusion Community pharmacists most frequently initiated practical issues, but explored patients’ medication beliefs less adequately. Discussing these beliefs might be easier by increasing patient engagement in the consultation and providing training programs for pharmacists.

Como se estuda o que não se diz: uma revisão sobre demanda oculta

Objetivos: Pessoas com demandas aparentemente bem delimitadas podem, muitas vezes, ter queixas ou preocupações ocultas ou tardiamente apresentadas, chamadas em inglês de hidden agenda, by the way syndrome ou doorknob syndrome (“síndrome da maçaneta”). Poucos trabalhos abordam o fenômeno em contexto clínico discutindo seus aspectos ou consequências sobre o cuidado do ponto de vista sociocultural. Uma pesquisa qualitativa sobre saúde dos homens realizada pelos autores exigiu estudar a produção científica relacionada à hidden agenda de forma descritiva e interpretativa. Métodos: Esta revisão, do tipo estado da questão, abarcou artigos que tratassem da hidden agenda (ou expressões similares) no contexto clínico geral ou especializado, médico ou multiprofissional, em português, inglês ou espanhol, no período de 2000 a 2014. Partindo de 210 resultados iniciais em 3 bases de dados internacionais, foram selecionadas 39 publicações, que foram avaliadas quanto a características objetivas e subjetivas. Resultados: Identificando os temas predominantes nas pesquisas, notamos que hidden agenda é a expressão mais específica, sendo demanda oculta sua melhor tradução. Quase todos os estudos relacionavam a atenção a demandas ocultas a melhores desfechos ou desdobramentos do atendimento, embora nenhum avaliasse essas consequências de forma aprofundada. Conclusão: A revisão deixa claro que a demanda oculta é um elemento problematizador para pensar a prática médica e potencializador para a clínica, especialmente ao buscar-se um cuidado integral e um diálogo efetivo entre profissional e usuário(a). São necessários estudos que articulem o fenômeno a aspectos socioculturais ou tecnoassistenciais e que contemplem alguma discussão sobre construção da demanda, ausente nos artigos revisados.

Soliciting additional concerns in the primary care consultation and the utility of a brief communication intervention to aid solicitation: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on the practice of soliciting additional concerns (ACs) and the acceptability and utility of two brief interventions (prompts) designed to aid the solicitation.

METHODS

Eighteen GPs participating in a feasibility randomised controlled trial were interviewed. Interviews were semi-structured and audio-recorded. Data were analysed using a Framework Approach.

RESULTS

Participants perceived eliciting ACs as important for: reducing the need for multiple visits, identifying serious illness early, and increasing patient and GP satisfaction. GPs found the prompts easy to use and some continued their use after the study had ended to aid time management. Others noted similarities between the intervention and their usual practice. Nevertheless, soliciting ACs in every consultation was not unanimously supported.

CONCLUSION

The prompts were acceptable to GPs within a trial context, but there was disagreement as to whether ACs should be solicited routinely. Some GPs considered the intervention to aid their prioritisation efficiency within consultations.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Some GPs will find prompts which encourage ACs to be solicited early in the consultation enable them to better organise priorities and manage time-limited consultations more effectively.

Medication decision making and patient outcomes in GP, nurse and pharmacist prescriber consultations

Aim The aims of this study were twofold: (a) to explore whether specific components of shared decision making were present in consultations involving nurse prescribers (NPs), pharmacist prescribers (PPs) and general practitioners (GPs) and (b) to relate these to self-reported patient outcomes including satisfaction, adherence and patient perceptions of practitioner empathy.

BACKGROUND

There are a range of ways for defining and measuring the process of concordance, or shared decision making as it relates to decisions about medicines. As a result, demonstrating a convincing link between shared decision making and patient benefit is challenging. In the United Kingdom, nurses and pharmacists can now take on a prescribing role, engaging in shared decision making. Given the different professional backgrounds of GPs, NPs and PPs, this study sought to explore the process of shared decision making across these three prescriber groups.

METHODS

Analysis of audio-recordings of consultations in primary care in South England between patients and GPs, NPs and PPs. Analysis of patient questionnaires completed post consultation. Findings A total of 532 consultations were audio-recorded with 20 GPs, 19 NPs and 12 PPs. Prescribing decisions occurred in 421 (79%). Patients were given treatment options in 21% (102/482) of decisions, the prescriber elicited the patient's treatment preference in 18% (88/482) and the patient expressed a treatment preference in 24% (118/482) of decisions. PPs were more likely to ask for the patient's preference about their treatment regimen (χ 2=6.6, P=0.036, Cramer's V=0.12) than either NPs or GPs. Of the 275 patient questionnaires, 192(70%) could be matched with a prescribing decision. NP patients had higher satisfaction levels than patients of GPs or PPs. More time describing treatment options was associated with increased satisfaction, adherence and greater perceived practitioner empathy. While defining, measuring and enabling the process of shared decision making remains challenging, it may have patient benefit.