Perceptions of the Nurse Practitioner Role in Facilitating the Implementation of an Onsite Pain Management Team in Long Term Care

Background: One strategy to improve pain management in long term care (LTC) is to optimize the emerging role of the nurse practitioner (NP) in LTC. The purpose of this sub study was to learn about the NP role in implementing an onsite, interdisciplinary Pain Team in the LTC home setting.

Methods: We used a case study design that included two NPs who worked at separate LTC homes. Each of the NPs completed a weekly questionnaire of pain-related activities that they engaged in over a one-year implementation period; and a diary, using critical reflection, about their experiences and strategies used to implement the Pain Team. Descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis were used to analyze the case study data.

Findings: NPs tended to be most engaged in pain assessment and collaborated more with licensed nurses and personal support workers; less with pharmacists. NPs were more involved in organizational level activities, such as participating in committee work or assisting with the development of policies and procedures about pain. NPs created palliative care and pain service protocols; engaged in policy development, in-servicing, quality assurance and advocacy; and encouraged best practices. NPs were challenged with time constraints for pain management and balancing other role priorities and felt that increased scope of practice for them was needed.

Conclusions: The results of this study highlight how NPs implemented a Pain Team in LTC which may be helpful to others interested in implementing a similar strategy to reduce residents’ pain.

The development of the PROMPT (PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People’s Treatments) criteria

BACKGROUND: Whilst multimorbidity is more prevalent with increasing age, approximately 30% of middle-aged adults (45-64 years) are also affected. Several prescribing criteria have been developed to optimise medication use in older people (≥65 years) with little focus on potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in middle-aged adults. We have developed a set of explicit prescribing criteria called PROMPT (PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People's Treatments) which may be applied to prescribing datasets to determine the prevalence of PIP in this age-group.

METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify published prescribing criteria for all age groups, with the Project Steering Group (convened for this study) adding further criteria for consideration, all of which were reviewed for relevance to middle-aged adults. These criteria underwent a two-round Delphi process, using an expert panel consisting of general practitioners, pharmacists and clinical pharmacologists from the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Using web-based questionnaires, 17 panellists were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each criterion via a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) to assess the applicability to middle-aged adults in the absence of clinical information. Criteria were accepted/rejected/revised dependent on the panel's level of agreement using the median response/interquartile range and additional comments.

RESULTS: Thirty-four criteria were rated in the first round of this exercise and consensus was achieved on 17 criteria which were accepted into the PROMPT criteria. Consensus was not reached on the remaining 17, and six criteria were removed following a review of the additional comments. The second round of this exercise focused on the remaining 11 criteria, some of which were revised following the first exercise. Five criteria were accepted from the second round, providing a final list of 22 criteria [gastro-intestinal system (n = 3), cardiovascular system (n = 4), respiratory system (n = 4), central nervous system (n = 6), infections (n = 1), endocrine system (n = 1), musculoskeletal system (n = 2), duplicates (n = 1)].

CONCLUSIONS: PROMPT is the first set of prescribing criteria developed for use in middle-aged adults. The utility of these criteria will be tested in future studies using prescribing datasets.

A critical ethnography of communication processes involving the management of oral chemotherapeutic agents by patients with a primary diagnosis of colorectal cancer: study protocol

Aim
To describe the protocol used to examine the processes of communication between health professionals, patients and informal carers during the management of oral chemotherapeutic medicines to identify factors that promote or inhibit medicine concordance.

Background
Ideally communication practices about oral medicines should incorporate shared decision-making, two-way dialogue and an equality of role between practitioner and patient. While there is evidence that healthcare professionals are adopting these concordant elements in general practice there are still some patients who have a passive role during consultations. Considering oral chemotherapeutic medications, there is a paucity of research about communication practices which is surprising given the high risk of toxicity associated with chemotherapy.

Design
A critical ethnographic design will be used, incorporating non-participant observations, individual semi-structured and focus-group interviews as several collecting methods.

Methods
Observations will be carried out on the interactions between healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses and pharmacists) and patients in the outpatient departments where prescriptions are explained and supplied and on follow-up consultations where treatment regimens are monitored. Interviews will be conducted with patients and their informal carers. Focus-groups will be carried out with healthcare professionals at the conclusion of the study. These several will be analysed using thematic analysis. This research is funded by the Department for Employment and Learning in Northern Ireland (Awarded February 2012).

Discussion
Dissemination of these findings will contribute to the understanding of issues involved when communicating with people about oral chemotherapy. It is anticipated that findings will inform education, practice and policy.

Alcohol, Tobacco and Pharmacy Students: Usage and Views on Professional Issues

Introduction/background: This study aimed to ascertain pharmacy students’ use and views on cigarettes and alcohol (including in relation to provision of health promotion advice) and to establish if alcohol intake affected academic performance. Within the United Kingdom (UK), there has been limited research conducted in this area
Methods: Following ethical approval, pharmacy students (n=581) were invited to participate in a pre-piloted electronic questionnaire, consisting of 21 questions on smoking and alcohol. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests were used for data analyses.
Results: A response rate of 64.5% (375/581) was obtained (69.9% female, 30.2% male). Many respondents (77.9%) reported that they drank alcohol; whereas only 3.7% stated they currently smoked cigarettes. Students who drank alcohol were more likely to fail elements of the program than those who did not. Less than half (47.8%) were in agreement that it was hypocritical for a pharmacist to give health promotion advice and then get drunk outside of work.
Discussion/conclusions: Students seem to consider that lifestyle recommendations are less relevant for themselves and also that a pharmacist’s responsibility centers on providing advice, rather than being a role-model. Alcohol consumption appears to negatively influence academic achievement.

A patient perspective of pharmacist prescribing: 'crossing the specialisms-crossing the illnesses'

Background: The drive for non-medical prescribing has progressed quickly since the late 1990s and involves a range of healthcare professionals including pharmacists. As part of a commissioned research project, this qualitative element of a larger case study focused on the views of patients of pharmacist prescribers. 

Objective: The aim of this study was to explore patients' perspectives of pharmacists as prescribers. 

Methods: Three pharmacists working as independent prescribers in the clinical areas of (i) hypertension, (ii) cardiovascular/diabetes management, (iii) anticoagulation were recruited to three case studies of pharmacist prescribing in Northern Ireland. One hundred and five patients were invited to participate in focus groups after they had been prescribed for by the pharmacist. Focus groups took place between November 2010 and March 2011 (ethical/governance approvals granted) were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, read independently by two authors and analysed using constant comparative analysis. 

Results: Thirty-four patients agreed to participate across seven focus groups. Analysis revealed the emergence of one overarching theme: team approach to patient care. A number of subthemes related to the role of the pharmacist, the role of the doctor and patient benefits. There was an overwhelming lack of awareness of pharmacist prescribing. Patients discussed the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to their care and recognized limitations of the current model of prescribing. 

Conclusion: Patients were positive about pharmacist prescribing and felt that a team approach to their care was the ideal model especially when treating those with more complex conditions. Despite positive attitudes, there was a general lack of awareness of this new mode of practice.

Challenges of managing medications for older people at transition points of care

In clinical practice, pharmacists play a very important role in identifying and correcting medication discrepancies as older patients move across transition points of care. With increasing complexity of health care needs of older people, these discrepancies are likely to increase. The major concern with identifying and correcting medication discrepancies is that medication reconciliation is considered a retrospective problem – that is, dealing with medication discrepancies after they have occurred. It is argued here that a more proactive stance should be taken where doctors, nurses and pharmacists collectively work together to prevent medication discrepancies from happening in the first place. Improved involvement of patients and family members will help to facilitate better management of medications across transition points of care. Efficient use of information technology aids, such as electronic medication reconciliation tools, should also assist with organizational systems problems associated with the working culture, heavy workloads, and staff and skill mix of health professionals.

“It’s very complicated”: a qualitative study of medicines management in intermediate care facilities in Northern Ireland

Background: Intermediate care (IC) describes a range of services targeted at older people, aimed at preventing unnecessary hospitalisation, promoting faster recovery from illness and maximising independence. Older people are at increased risk of medication-related adverse events, but little is known about the provision of medicines management services in IC facilities. This study aimed to describe the current provision of medicines management services in IC facilities in Northern Ireland (NI) and to explore healthcare workers' (HCWs) and patients' views of, and attitudes towards these services and the IC concept. 

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a constant comparative approach with HCWs and patients from IC facilities in NI. 

Results: Interviews were conducted with 25 HCWs and 18 patients from 12 IC facilities in NI. Three themes were identified: 'concept and reality', 'setting and supply' and 'responsibility and review'. A mismatch between the concept of IC and the reality was evident. The IC facility setting dictated prescribing responsibilities and the supply of medicines, presenting challenges for HCWs. A lack of a standardised approach to responsibility for the provision of medicines management services including clinical review was identified. Whilst pharmacists were not considered part of the multidisciplinary team, most HCWs recognised a need for their input. Medicines management was not a concern for the majority of IC patients. 

Conclusions: Medicines management services are not integral to IC and medicine-related challenges are frequently encountered. Integration of pharmacists into the multidisciplinary team could potentially improve medicines management in IC.

Making the case for change: what researchers need to consider when designing behaviour change interventions aimed at improving medication dispensing.

There is a growing emphasis on behavior change in intervention development programmes aimed at improving public health and healthcare professionals' practice. A number of frameworks and methodological tools have been established to assist researchers in developing interventions seeking to change healthcare professionals' behaviors. The key features of behavior change intervention design involve specifying the target group (i.e. healthcare professional or patient cohort), the target behavior and identifying mediators (i.e. barriers and facilitators) of behavior change. Once the target behavior is clearly specified and understood, specific behavior change techniques can then be used as the basis of the intervention to target identified mediators of behavior change. This commentary outlines the challenges for pharmacy practice-based researchers in targeting dispensing as a behavior when developing behavior change interventions aimed at pharmacists and proposes a definition of dispensing to consider in future research.

Managing pain medications in long-term care: nurses' views

The purpose of this study was to explore nurses' perceptions of their current practices related to administering pain medications to long-term care (LTC) residents. A cross-sectional survey design was used, including both quantitative and open-ended questions. Data were collected from 165 nurses (59% response rate) at nine LTC homes in southern Ontario, Canada. The majority (85%) felt that the medication administration system was adequate to help them manage residents' pain and 98% felt comfortable administering narcotics. In deciding to administer a narcotic, nurses were influenced by pain assessments, physician orders, diagnosis, past history, effectiveness of non-narcotics and fear of making dosage miscalculations or developing addictions. Finally, most nurses stated that they trusted the physicians and pharmacists to ensure orders were safe. These findings highlight nurses' perceptions of managing pain medications in LTC and related areas where continuing education initiatives for nurses are needed.

Prevalence, Nature, Severity and Risk Factors for Prescribing Errors in Hospital Inpatients: Prospective Study in 20 UK Hospitals

Introduction: It has been suggested that doctors in their first year of post-graduate training make a disproportionate number of prescribing errors.

Obkective: This study aimed to compare the prevalence of prescribing errors made by first-year post-graduate doctors with that of errors by senior doctors and non-medical prescribers and to investigate the predictors of potentially serious prescribing errors.

Methods: Pharmacists in 20 hospitals over 7 prospectively selected days collected data on the number of medication orders checked, the grade of prescriber and details of any prescribing errors. Logistic regression models (adjusted for clustering by hospital) identified factors predicting the likelihood of prescribing erroneously and the severity of prescribing errors.

Results: Pharmacists reviewed 26,019 patients and 124,260 medication orders; 11,235 prescribing errors were detected in 10,986 orders. The mean error rate was 8.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.6-9.1) errors per 100 medication orders. Rates of errors for all doctors in training were significantly higher than rates for medical consultants. Doctors who were 1 year (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95 % CI 1.80-2.52) or 2 years in training (OR 2.23; 95 % CI 1.89-2.65) were more than twice as likely to prescribe erroneously. Prescribing errors were 70 % (OR 1.70; 95 % CI 1.61-1.80) more likely to occur at the time of hospital admission than when medication orders were issued during the hospital stay. No significant differences in severity of error were observed between grades of prescriber. Potentially serious errors were more likely to be associated with prescriptions for parenteral administration, especially for cardiovascular or endocrine disorders.

Conclusions: The problem of prescribing errors in hospitals is substantial and not solely a problem of the most junior medical prescribers, particularly for those errors most likely to cause significant patient harm. Interventions are needed to target these high-risk errors by all grades of staff and hence improve patient safety.

Improving appropriate polypharmacy for older people in primary care: selecting components of an evidence-based intervention to target prescribing and dispensing.

Background
The use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy) is increasingly common in older people. Ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate combinations of medications (appropriate polypharmacy) is a significant challenge. The quality of evidence to support the effectiveness of interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is low. Systematic identification of mediators of behaviour change, using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), provides a theoretically robust evidence base to inform intervention design. This study aimed to (1) identify key theoretical domains that were perceived to influence the prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older patients by general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists, and (2) map domains to associated behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to include as components of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care.

Methods
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of each healthcare professional (HCP) group using tailored topic guides based on TDF version 1 (12 domains). Questions covering each domain explored HCPs’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to ensuring the prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older people. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis involved the framework method and content analysis. Key domains were identified and mapped to BCTs based on established methods and discussion within the research team.

Results
Thirty HCPs were interviewed (15 GPs, 15 pharmacists). Eight key domains were identified, perceived to influence prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy: ‘Skills’, ‘Beliefs about capabilities’, ‘Beliefs about consequences’, ‘Environmental context and resources’, ‘Memory, attention and decision processes’, ‘Social/professional role and identity’, ‘Social influences’ and ‘Behavioural regulation’. Following mapping, four BCTs were selected for inclusion in an intervention for GPs or pharmacists: ‘Action planning’, ‘Prompts/cues’, ‘Modelling or demonstrating of behaviour’ and ‘Salience of consequences’. An additional BCT (‘Social support or encouragement’) was selected for inclusion in a community pharmacy-based intervention in order to address barriers relating to interprofessional working that were encountered by pharmacists.

Conclusions
Selected BCTs will be operationalised in a theory-based intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy for older people, to be delivered in GP practice and community pharmacy settings. Future research will involve development and feasibility testing of this intervention.

Pharmacy students' use and views on over-the-counter (OTC) medicines; a questionnaire study

Introduction
The role of the pharmacist centers on ensuring the safe and effective use of medicines, including over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. It is important to ascertain pharmacy students’ use and opinions on OTC medicines, given that they are the pharmacists of the future and that this market continues to expand. This study aimed to investigate Queen’s University Belfast (QUB) final year pharmacy students’ use and views on OTC medicines. Scarce work has been conducted in this area to date.

Methods
Following ethical approval and a pilot study, all students (n=155) were invited to participate in a self-completed questionnaire (n=20 questions), distributed at a mandatory class. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests (Chi-squared and Mann Whitney U-test) were used for data analyses.

Results
The response rate was 99.4% (154/155). The majority (153/155) reported using OTC medicines; the key consideration during personal product selection was effectiveness. Most [96.1% (147/153)] were in agreement that safety was the over-riding concern during OTC consultations. While 96.1% (149/155) considered that using an evidence-based approach improved the quality of patient care, 68.0% (104/153) would be prepared to sell a product that lacks evidence of effectiveness, provided it would not cause harm.

Conclusions
The importance of evidence of effectiveness was acknowledged, yet many students in this study were prepared to recommend unproven products. Further strategies are required at QUB to ensure this routine consideration alongside safety in practice.

Pharmacist-led feedback workshops increase appropriate prescribing of antimicrobials

Objectives To investigate whether and how structured feedback sessions can increase rates of appropriate antimicrobial prescribing by junior doctors.

Methods This was a mixed-methods study, with a conceptual orientation towards complexity and systems thinking. Fourteen junior doctors, in their first year of training, were randomized to intervention (feedback) and 21 to control (routine practice) groups in a single UK teaching hospital. Feedback on their antimicrobial prescribing was given, in writing and via group sessions. Pharmacists assessed the appropriateness of all new antimicrobial prescriptions 2 days per week for 6 months (46 days). The mean normalized prescribing rates of suboptimal to all prescribing were compared between groups using the t-test. Thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with 10 participants investigated whether and how the intervention had impact.

Results Data were collected on 204 prescriptions for 166 patients. For the intervention group, the mean normalized rate of suboptimal to all prescribing was 0.32 ± 0.36; for the control group, it was 0.68 ± 0.36. The normalized rates of suboptimal prescribing were significantly different between the groups (P = 0.0005). The qualitative data showed that individuals' prescribing behaviour was influenced by a complex series of dynamic interactions between individual and social variables, such as interplay between personal knowledge and the expectations of others.

Conclusions The feedback intervention increased appropriate prescribing by acting as a positive stimulus within a complex network of behavioural influences. Prescribing behaviour is adaptive and can be positively influenced by structured feedback. Changing doctors' perceptions of acceptable, typical and best practice could reduce suboptimal antimicrobial prescribing.

A change in behaviour — getting the balance right for research and policy.

Behaviour change interventions offer clinical pharmacists many opportunities to optimise the use of medicines. ‘MINDSPACE’ is a framework used by a Government-affiliated organisation in the United Kingdom to communicate an approach to changing behaviour through policy. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) organises constructs of psychological theories that are most relevant to behaviour change into 14 domains. Both frameworks offer a way of identifying what drives a change in behaviour, providing a target for an intervention. This article aims to compare and contrast MINDSPACE and the TDF, and serves to inform pharmacy practitioners about the potential strengths and weaknesses of using either framework in a clinical pharmacy context. It appears that neither framework can deliver evidence-based interventions that can be developed and implemented with the pace demanded by policy and practice-based settings. A collaborative approach would ensure timely development of acceptable behaviour change interventions that are grounded in evidence.

PIPc study: development of indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care using a modified Delphi technique

Objective There is limited evidence regarding the quality of prescribing for children in primary care. Several prescribing criteria (indicators) have been developed to assess the appropriateness of prescribing in older and middle-aged adults but few are relevant to children. The objective of this study was to develop a set of prescribing indicators that can be applied to prescribing or dispensing data sets to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care settings.


Design Two-round modified Delphi consensus method.


Setting Irish and UK general practice.


Participants A project steering group consisting of academic and clinical general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists was formed to develop a list of indicators from literature review and clinical expertise. 15 experts consisting of GPs, pharmacists and paediatricians from the Republic of Ireland and the UK formed the Delphi panel.


Results 47 indicators were reviewed by the project steering group and 16 were presented to the Delphi panel. In the first round of this exercise, consensus was achieved on nine of these indicators. Of the remaining seven indicators, two were removed following review of expert panel comments and discussion of the project steering group. The second round of the Delphi process focused on the remaining five indicators, which were amended based on first round feedback. Three indicators were accepted following the second round of the Delphi process and the remaining two indicators were removed. The final list consisted of 12 indicators categorised by respiratory system (n=6), gastrointestinal system (n=2), neurological system (n=2) and dermatological system (n=2).


Conclusions The PIPc indicators are a set of prescribing criteria developed for use in children in primary care in the absence of clinical information. The utility of these criteria will be tested in further studies using prescribing databases.