87 resultados para pharmacists
Resumo:
To ascertain the thoughts of selected professional leaders on matters relating to pharmacist professionalism. These views will help build a picture of the professional status of pharmacy. Methods - Semi-structured interviews were conducted between July and November 2013 with representatives from eight UK pharmacy leadership bodies. The bodies were selected for their roles in pharmacy policy development, regulation and professional representation. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis by constant comparison identified a number of emerging themes. Results - The following emerging themes were identified from the interview data: Influence of the Pharmacy Landscape: Participants highlighted the role that pharmacy plays within the National Health Service and wider society and how future developments may affect the professional status currently afforded to pharmacists. Vocalising Pharmacy: Communication within the profession and also with those external to the profession, including other healthcare professionals and the general public, is important to ensure a high professional standing. The Impact of Commercialism: Professionalism and commercialism were generally seen to be antithetical and a rise in commercialism may adversely impact on external perceptions of the professionalism of pharmacy. Responsibility for Professionalism: The professional image of pharmacy is maintained by the individuals operating within it regardless of their scope of practice. It is the responsibility of all those individuals to ensure that they actively demonstrate ‘professional’ behaviours. The Journey to Professionalism: Acquiring a professional ethos is a continual process but there are stages in a pharmacist’s development that are considered particularly important. These include upbringing, undergraduate education and pre-registration training. Conclusions - Pharmacy’s professional status in the UK remains open to challenge and vital to retaining that status is the public perception of pharmacists. Future research examining pharmacy’s claims to professional status should focus on exploring the attitudes of the general public in addition to the views of pharmacists.
Resumo:
The progression of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is largely modifiable through lifestyle behaviours. UK pharmacists are contractually obliged to facilitate patient self-management of chronic conditions such as CVD. Pharmacists are easily accessible health professionals who are well placed to identify “at risk” patients through medication regimes. Research has identified varying attitudes towards and levels of involvement in pharmacist-led health promotion activity. Given the diverse and exploratory nature of the work, a pragmatic, mixed methods approach was used to explore community pharmacists’ role in facilitating patient self-management of CVD. The thesis presents four studies: a qualitative study with pharmacists; a cross sectional questionnaire of community pharmacists; a systematic review and a qualitative study with patients with CVD. The qualitative study with pharmacists gave an insight into pharmacists’ experiences of giving patients with CVD lifestyle advice and the factors underpinning commonly cited barriers to providing public health services. This informed the development of the cross-sectional questionnaire which identified the predictors of pharmacists’ intentions to give two different types of advice to facilitate patient self-management. The systematic review identified a small number of interventions to prepare pharmacists to facilitate patient lifestyle behaviour change and evaluated the theories and behaviour change techniques used in successful interventions; however due to poor study quality and poor reporting of the interventions limited conclusions about the efficacy of the interventions could reliably be drawn. Finally, the qualitative study gave an insight into the experiences of patients with CVD using community pharmacy services and their expectations of the service they receive from community pharmacists. Recommendations about changes to pharmacy policy and practice in order to support pharmacists’ provision of CVD self-management advice are made.
Resumo:
Background: In 2008, the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale was generated through a combination of laboratory data, literature review, and expert opinion. This scale identified an increased risk in mortality and worsening cognitive function in multiple populations, including 13,000 older adults in the United Kingdom. We present an updated scale based on new information and new medications available to the market. Methods: We conducted a systematic review for publications recognizing medications with adverse cognitive effects due to anti-cholinergic properties and found no new medications since 2008.Therefore we identified medications from a review of newly ap-proved medications since 2008 and medications identified throughthe clinical experience of the authors. To be included in the updatedACB scale, medications must have met the following criteria; ACBscore of 1: evidence from in vitro data that the medication has antag-onist activity at muscarinic receptors; ACB score of 2: evidence fromliterature, prescriber’s information, or expert opinion of clinical anti-cholinergic effect; ACB score of 3: evidence from literature, pre-scriber’s information, or expert opinion of the medication causingdelirium. Results: The reviewer panel included two geriatric pharmacists,one geriatric psychiatrist, one geriatrician, and one hospitalist.Twenty-three medications were eligible for review and possible inclu-sion in the updated ACB scale. Of these, seven medications were ex-cluded due to a lack of evidence for anticholinergic activity. Of the re-maining 16 medications, ten had laboratory evidence ofanticholinergic activity and added to the ACB list with a score of one.One medication was added with a score of two. Five medicationswere included in the ACB scale with a score of three.Conclusions: The revised ACB scale provides an update of med-ications with anticholinergic effects that may increase the risk of cog-nitive impairment. Future updates will be routinely conducted tomaintain an applicable library of medications for use in clinical andresearch environments.
Resumo:
How good is your pharmacy practice? And what does “good” look like? Take a look back at the education and training you have received in your career to date. Has it stood you in good stead? Certainly there is a need to establish a model of professional education and development that produces good pharmacists — you should be able to demonstrate your competence regardless of your sector of work. It may help if we move away from the view that excellence in pharmacy practice is primarily defined by where you practise and the kind of job that you do. The Modernising Pharmacy Careers programme’s aspirations to integrate the undergraduate degree with the preregistration training year are bold and to be applauded — provided the outcome delivers changes that are more than superficial. The new model needs to deliver greater integration of education with practice, while retaining an adequate science base. Theory should be put into the context of practice-based, cross-sector learning needs and opportunities. For example, is the classroom really the best environment in which to learn dispensing? Pharmacokinetic theory could be put into context through creatively designed work placements. And it might make more sense to learn patient counselling in a community pharmacy, and so on. Is it resources we lack to make this happen? Or do we lack the collective will to be imaginative, to be radical and to conceive new approaches to professional education? Implicit in this new approach to education is the expectation that pharmacists should teach and mentor and, conversely, that those who teach should also engage in relevant practice. University education must produce graduates whose knowledge and competence are useful to employers. Moreover, graduates must be adequately prepared to enter any area of the profession endowed with professional self-confidence (something, arguably, that needs further development within the pharmacy psyche). Of course, becoming qualified is just the beginning. Post-qualification, pharmacists need structured career paths that foster this professional confidence, support learning and ensure recognition. To this end, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society-led professional curriculum group is working to define knowledge, skills and experience for all areas of advanced practice. More than ever, the profession needs to adopt a culture of learning, teaching and practice research that is unified. The question is: how do we move away from merely collecting qualifications (trophies) to developing meaningful careers? Pharmacists in all areas and at all levels of the profession need to consider their own willingness to make this shift. The RPS and MPC are leading the way, but are we following?
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: The inappropriate use of antipsychotics in people with dementia for behaviour that challenges is associated with an estimated 1800 deaths annually. However, solely focusing on antipsychotics may transfer prescribing to other equally dangerous psychotropics. Little is known about the role of pharmacists in the management of psychotropics used to treat behaviours that challenge. This research aims to determine whether it is feasible to implement and measure the effectiveness of a combined pharmacy-health psychology intervention incorporating a medication review and staff training package to limit the prescription of psychotropics to manage behaviour that challenges in care home residents with dementia. METHODS/ANALYSIS: 6 care homes within the West Midlands will be recruited. People with dementia receiving medication for behaviour that challenges, or their personal consultee, will be approached regarding participation. Medication used to treat behaviour that challenges will be reviewed by the pharmacist, in collaboration with the general practitioner (GP), person with dementia and carer. The behavioural intervention consists of a training package for care home staff and GPs promoting person-centred care and treating behaviours that challenge as an expression of unmet need. The primary outcome measure is the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version (NPI-NH). Other outcomes include quality of life (EQ-5D and DEMQoL), cognition (sMMSE), health economic (CSRI) and prescribed medication including whether recommendations were implemented. Outcome data will be collected at 6 weeks, and 3 and 6 months. Pretraining and post-training interviews will explore stakeholders' expectations and experiences of the intervention. Data will be used to estimate the sample size for a definitive study. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The project has received a favourable opinion from the East Midlands REC (15/EM/3014). If potential participants lack capacity, a personal consultee will be consulted regarding participation in line with the Mental Capacity Act. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.
Resumo:
To explore the views of pharmacy and rheumatology stakeholders about system-related barriers to medicines optimisation activities with young people with long-term conditions. A three-phase consensus-building study comprising (1) focus groups with community and hospital pharmacists; (2) semi-structured telephone interviews with lay and professional adolescent rheumatology stakeholders and pharmacy policymakers, and (3) multidisciplinary discussion groups with community and hospital pharmacists and rheumatology staff. Qualitative verbatim transcripts from phases 1 and 2 were subjected to framework analysis. Themes from phase 1 underpinned a briefing for phase 2 interviewees. Themes from phases 1 and 2 generated elements of good pharmacy practice and current/future pharmacy roles for ranking in phase 3. Results from phase 3 prioritisation and ranking exercises were captured on self-completion data collection forms, entered into an Excel spreadsheet and subjected to descriptive statistical analysis. Institutional ethical approval was given by Aston University Health and Life Sciences Research Ethics Committee. Four focus groups were conducted with 18 pharmacists across England, Scotland and Wales (7 hospital, 10 community and 1 community/public health). Fifteen stakeholders took part in telephone interviews (3 pharmacist commissioners; 2 pharmacist policymakers; 2 pharmacy staff members (1 community and 1 hospital); 4 rheumatologists; 1 specialist nurse, and 3 lay juvenile arthritis advocates). Twenty-five participants took part in three discussion groups in adolescent rheumatology centres across England and Scotland (9 community pharmacists; 4 hospital pharmacists; 6 rheumatologists; 5 specialist nurses, and 1 physiotherapist). In all phases of the study, system-level issues were acknowledged as barriers to more engagement with young people and families. Community pharmacists in the focus groups reported that opportunities for engaging with young people were low if parents collected prescriptions alone, which was agreed by other stakeholders. Moreover, institutional/company prescription collection policies – an activity largely disallowed for a young person under 16 without an accompanying parent - were identified by hospital and community pharmacists as barriers to open discussion and engagement. Few community pharmacists reported using Medicines Use Review (England/Wales) or Chronic Medication Service (Scotland) as a medicines optimisation activity with young people; many were unsure about consent procedures. Despite these limitations, rheumatology stakeholders ranked highly the potential of pharmacists empowering young people with general health care skills, such as repeat prescription ordering. The pharmacy profession lacks vision for its role in the care of young people with long-term conditions. Pharmacists and rheumatology stakeholders identified system-level barriers to more engagement with young people who take medicines regularly. We acknowledge that the modest number of participants may have had a specific interest and thus bias for the topic, but this underscores their frank admission of the challenges. Professional guidance and policy, practice frameworks and institutional/company policies must promote flexibility for pharmacy staff to recognise and empower young people who are able to give consent and take responsibility for medicines activities. This will increase mutual confidence and trust, and foster pharmacy’s role in teaching general health care skills. In this way, pharmacists will be able to build long-term relationships with young people and families.
Resumo:
PHAR-QA, funded by the European Commission, is producing a framework of competences for pharmacy practice. The framework is in line with the EU directive on sectoral professions and takes into account the diversity of the pharmacy profession and the on-going changes in healthcare systems (with an increasingly important role for pharmacists), and in the pharmaceutical industry. PHAR-QA is asking academia, students and practicing pharmacists to rank competences required for practice. The results show that competences in the areas of drug interactions, need for drug treatment and provision of information and service were ranked highest whereas those in the areas of ability to design and conduct research and development and production of medicines were ranked lower. For the latter two categories, industrial pharmacists ranked them higher than did the other five groups
Resumo:
Substitution of branded medicine with a generic equivalent is already common. Robin Ferner, Warren Lenney, and John Marriott argue that concerns about UK plans to let pharmacists make the decision are unwarranted.
Resumo:
Background and objectives: The goal of the PHAR-QA (Qualityassurance in European pharmacy education and training) project isthe production of a European framework of competences for pharmacypractice. This PHAR-QA framework (www.phar-qa.eu) will beEuropean and consultative i.e. it will be used for harmonization—butwill not to replace existing national QA systems.Methods: Using the proposals for competences produced by the previousPHARMINE(Pharmacy education in Europe; www.pharmine.eu) project, together with those of other sources, the authors produced a listof 68 personal and patient care competencies. Using internet surveytools the stakeholders—European pharmacy community (universitydepartment staff and students, community, hospital and industrialpharmacists, as well as pharmacists working in clinical biology andother branches, together with representatives of chambers and associations)—were invited to rank the proposals and add comments.Results and conclusions: Pharmacology and pharmacotherapy togetherwith competences such as ‘‘supply of appropriate medicinestaking into account dose, correct formulation, concentration, administrationroute and timing’’ ranked high. Other topics such as ‘‘currentknowledge of design, synthesis, isolation, characterisation and biologicalevaluation of active substances’’ ranked lower.Implications for practice: In the short term, it is anticipated that thissurvey will stimulate a productive discussion on pharmacy educationand practice by the various stakeholders. In the long term, thisframework could serve as a European model framework of competencesfor pharmacy practice.Acknowledgements: With the support of the Lifelong Learningprogramme of the European Union: 527194-LLP-1-2012-1-BEERASMUS-EMCR. This publication reflects the views only of theauthors; the Commission cannot be held responsible for any usewhich may be made of the information contained therein.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: Children on long term medication may be under the care of more than one medical team including the patients GP. Children on chronic medication should be supported and their medications reviewed, especially in cases of polypharmacy. Medicines Use Reviews (MURs) were introduced into the pharmacy contract in 2005. The service was designed for community pharmacists to review patients on long term medication. The service specified that MURs were done on patients who can give consent and cannot be conducted with a parent or carer. Hence the service may be inaccessible to paediatric patients. This review aims to find studies that identify medication review services in primary care that cater for children on long term medication. METHODS: A literature search was conducted on 6th June 2015 using the keywords, ("Medication" or "review" or "Medication Review" or "Medicines use review" or "Medication use review" or "New Medicine Service") AND ("community pharmacy" OR "community pharmacist" OR "primary care" OR "General practice" OR "GP" OR "community paediatrician" OR "community pediatrician" OR "community nurse"). Bibliographic databases used were AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, EMBASE, HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Health Business Elite. Inclusion criteria were: paediatric specific medication review in primary care, for example by either a GP, community paediatrician, community nurse or community pharmacist. Exclusion criteria were studies of medication review in adults/unclear patient age and secondary care medication reviews. RESULTS: From the 417 articles, 6 relevant articles were found after abstract and full text review. 235 articles were excluded after title and abstract review (11 did not have full text in English); 96 were adult or non-age specified medication review/MUR/New Medicine Service studies; 63 referred to observational, evaluative studies of interventions in adults; 6 were non-paediatric specific systematic reviews and 17 were protocols, commentaries, news, and letters.The 6 relevant articles consisted of 1 literature review (published 2004), 3 research articles and 1 published protocol. The literature review[1] recommended that children's long term medication should be reviewed. The published protocol stated that the NMS minimum age for inclusion in the trial was for children aged over 13 years of age. The four studies were related to psychiatrists reviewing paediatric mental health patients in the USA, a pharmacist using Drug Related Problem to review patients in GP practices in Australia, a UK study based on an information prescription concept by providing children dispensed medications in community pharmacy with signposting them to health information and one GP practice based study observing pharmaceutical care issues in children and adults. CONCLUSION: The results show that there are currently no known studies on medication use reviews specific to children, whereas in adults, published evaluations are available. The terms of the MUR policy restrict children's access to the service and so more studies are necessary to determine whether children could benefit from such access.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence/National Patient Safety Agency (NICE/NPSA) guidelines for medicines reconciliation (MR) on admission to hospital in adult inpatients were introduced in 2007, but they excluded children less than 16 years of age. METHOD: We conducted a survey of 98 paediatric pharmacists (each from a different hospital) to find out what the current practice of MR in children is in the UK. KEY FINDINGS: Responses showed that 67% (43/64) of pharmacists surveyed carried out MR in all children at admission and only a third 34% (22/64) had policies for MR in children. Of the respondents who did not carry out MR in all children, 80% (4/5) responded that they did so in selected children. Pharmacists considered themselves the most appropriate profession for carrying out MR. When asked whether the NICE guidance should be expanded to include children, 98% (54/55) of the respondents answered 'yes'. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the findings suggest that MR is being conducted inconsistently in children and most paediatric pharmacists would like national guidance to be expanded to include children.
Resumo:
Introduction: Since 2005, the workload of community pharmacists in England has increased with a concomitant increase in stress and work pressure. However, it is unclear how these factors are impacting on the ability of community pharmacists to ensure accuracy during the dispensing process. This research seeks to extend our understanding of the nature, outcome, and predictors of dispensing errors. Methodology: A retrospective analysis of a purposive sample of incident report forms (IRFs) from the database of a pharmacist indemnity insurance provider was conducted. Data collected included; type of error, degree of harm caused, pharmacy and pharmacist demographics, and possible contributory factors. Results: In total, 339 files from UK community pharmacies were retrieved from the database. The files dated from June 2006 to November 2011. Incorrect item (45.1%, n = 153/339) followed by incorrect strength (24.5%, n = 83/339) were the most common forms of error. Almost half (41.6%, n = 147/339) of the patients suffered some form of harm ranging from minor harm (26.7%, n = 87/339) to death (0.3%, n = 1/339). Insufficient staff (51.6%, n = 175/339), similar packaging (40.7%, n = 138/339) and the pharmacy being busier than normal (39.5%, n = 134/339) were identified as key contributory factors. Cross-tabular analysis against the final accuracy check variable revealed significant association between the pharmacy location (P < 0.024), dispensary layout (P < 0.025), insufficient staff (P < 0.019), and busier than normal (P < 0.005) variables. Conclusion: The results provide an overview of some of the individual, organisational and technical factors at play at the time of a dispensing error and highlight the need to examine further the relationships between these factors and dispensing error occurrence.