How was patient empowerment portrayed in information leaflets describing the community pharmacy Medicines Use Review service in the UK?

Objective The Medicines Use Review (MUR) community pharmacy service was introduced in 2005 to enhance patient empowerment but the service has not been taken up as widely as expected. We investigated the depiction of the patient–pharmacist power relationship within MUR patient information leaflets. Methods We identified 11 MUR leaflets including the official Department of Health MUR booklet and through discourse analysis examined the way language and imagery had been used to symbolise and give meaning to the MUR service, especially the portrayal of the patient–pharmacist interactions and the implied power relations. Results A variety of terminology was used to describe the MUR, a service that aimed ultimately to produce more informed patients through the information imparted by knowledgeable, skilled pharmacists. Conclusion The educational role of the MUR overshadowed the intended patient empowerment that would take place with a true concordance-centred approach. Although patient empowerment was implied, this was within the boundaries of the biomedical model with the pharmacist as the expert provider of medicines information. Practice implications If patient empowerment is to be conveyed this needs to be communicated to patients through consistent use of language and imagery that portrays the inclusivity intended.

A randomised controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis in a routine clinical service

Objective: To evaluate CBTp delivered by non-expert therapists, using CBT relevant measures. Methods: Participants (N=74) were randomised into immediate therapy or waiting list control groups. The therapy group was offered six months of therapy and followed up three months later. The waiting list group received therapy after waiting nine months (becoming the delayed therapy group). Results: Depression improved in the combined therapy group at both the end of therapy and follow-up. Other significant effects were found in only one of the two therapy groups (positive symptoms; cognitive flexibility; uncontrollability of thoughts) or one of the two timepoints (end of therapy: PANSS general symptoms, anxiety, suicidal ideation, social functioning, resistance to voices; follow-up: power beliefs about voices, negative symptoms). There was no difference in costs between the groups. Conclusions: The only robust improvement was in depression. Nevertheless, there were further encouraging but modest improvements in both emotional and cognitive variables, in addition to psychotic symptoms.