Provision of pharmaceutical care by community pharmacists:a comparison across Europe

Objective To investigate the provision of pharmaceutical care by community pharmacists across Europe and to examine the various factors that could affect its implementation. Methods A questionnaire-based survey of community pharmacies was conducted within 13 European countries. The questionnaire consisted of two sections. The first section focussed on demographic data and services provided in the pharmacy. The second section was a slightly adapted version of the Behavioral Pharmaceutical Care Scale (BPCS) which consists of three main dimensions (direct patient care activities, referral and consultation activities and instrumental activities). Results Response rates ranged from 10–71% between countries. The mean total score achieved by community pharmacists, expressed as a percentage of the total score achievable, ranged from 31.6 (Denmark) to 52.2% (Ireland). Even though different aspects of pharmaceutical care were implemented to different extents across Europe, it was noted that the lowest scores were consistently achieved in the direct patient care dimension (particularly those related to documentation, patient assessment and implementation of therapeutic objectives and monitoring plans) followed by performance evaluation and evaluation of patient satisfaction. Pharmacists who dispensed higher daily numbers of prescriptions in Ireland, Germany and Switzerland had significantly higher total BPCS scores. In addition, pharmacists in England and Ireland who were supported in their place of work by other pharmacists scored significantly higher on referral and consultation and had a higher overall provision of pharmaceutical care. Conclusion The present findings suggest that the provision of pharmaceutical care in community pharmacy is still limited within Europe. Pharmacists were routinely engaged in general activities such as patient record screening but were infrequently involved in patient centred professional activities such as the implementation of therapeutic objectives and monitoring plans, or in self-evaluation of performance.

Reducing medicines waste in the community

There is increasing concern at the amount and cost of prescribed medicines that are unused or wasted and then have to be disposed of. Previous studies have used health promotion and Dispose Unwanted Medicines Properly campaigns targeted at the patient to describe and quantify the annual cost of waste. The reasons patients return unused drugs to pharmacies have also been explored. The paper focuses on patient explanations for not needing medication; categorized as: over-collection in the past, self-management strategies, changes in medical condition, other changes in patient circumstances, or the repeat medicines policy at the surgery. The aim of the original study was to make a measurable change in prescribed medicines with a reduction in medicines wastage, whilst at the same time achieving improved standards of pharmaceutical care. Information on patient needs and behaviour came from consultation in the pharmacy monitoring forms and interview. The study was based on two medical practices in the West Midlands, UK, comparing an outer city and an inner city population. The participants were general practitioners, pharmacists and 350 repeat prescription patients. Prescriptions were issued for two three-month periods. The outcome was that 23.8% of the prescribed items were not dispensed, at a value of £13.1K, 58% of the medications that would be expected to be regularly supplied were collected. The study suggests that closer professional management at the point of dispensing and an understanding of patient experiences can help reduce the amount of unwanted medication collected by patients.

Influences on general practitioner prescribing with particular reference to community pharmacy

Influences on general practitioner prescribing of drugs continue to be of interest and importance as cost containment becomes central to Government health policy. This thesis employs a plurality of research methods including quantitative and qualitative survey techniques for example, questionnaires, interviews and prescription analyses to investigate some of the factors which may influence GP prescribing such as information sources, hospital consultants and in particular the community pharmacist. When the use and influence of drug information sources by GPs was examined, the community pharmacist was given a relatively low rating as a source but a high rating, similar to that of the consultant, for helpfulness. Influences are needed to improve prescribing and reduce the incidence of iatrogenic disease for the benefit of the patient. The education and expertise of pharmacists and their familiarity with local prescribing habits places them in a unique position to meet the needs of local GPs. As 96.5% of the public always or nearly always take their prescriptions to the same pharmacy, patient medication records, now kept by 77.5% of pharmacies, provide a valuable check on the appropriateness and safety of patients' medication. The barriers to the pharmacist's greater involvement were shown to be suspicion by GPs of pharmacists' motivation, isolation of many community pharmacists, difficulties in leaving the pharmacy for domiciliary visits, residential home care and GP practice meetings. These barriers must be lowered if the pharmacist is to have a greater influence and involvement. It was concluded that changes are necessary in pharmaceutical education, staff training, organisation and remuneration. Some changes in the targeting of remuneration to the pharmaceutical care services provided and registration of patients with pharmacies would contribute greatly to these aims.

Medication review of children on long term medications:a review of the literature

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.

A pharmacy workforce survey in the West Midlands: 3 primary care pharmacists

In a study to quantify the extent of current and planned employment of primary care pharmacists (PCPs) and to explore the experiences of PCPs and the perceptions of other pharmacists who aspire to become PCPs, it was found that the satisfaction experienced by primary care pharmacists appears to offset to some extent the dissatisfaction expressed about traditional pharmacy work in community pharmacy. The high level of interest in PCP work may also be a proxy for pharmacists' dissatisfaction.

The training experience of primary care pharmacists

Objectives — To map the tasks, activities and training provision for primary care pharmacists (PCPs) and to identify perceived future training needs. Methods — Survey undertaken in 1998/1999 using a pre-piloted, postal, self-completion questionnaire to two samples of PCPs. Setting — PCPs in (a) the West Midlands and (b) England (outside West Midlands). Key findings — The response rate was 66 per cent. A majority (68 per cent) had worked in the role for less than two years. Eighty per cent had some form of continuing education or training for the role although only 50 per cent had a formal qualification. Over two-thirds had contributed to the funding of their training, with one-third providing all funding. Seventy-four per cent of PCPs agreed that pharmacists should go through a procedure to ensure competence (accreditation) before being allowed to work for a general medical practice or primary care group. Views on the need for formal education/training prior to work differed: 82 per cent of those with formal qualifications, but only 46 per cent of those without, considered that this should be a requirement. There was general agreement that training/education had met training needs. Views on future training closely reflected previous training experiences, with a focus upon pharmaceutical roles rather than upon generic skill development and the acquisition of management skills. Conclusions — The study provides a snapshot in time of the experience of pioneer PCPs and the training available to them. PCPs will need further training or updating if they are to provide the wider roles required by the developing needs of the National Health Service. Consideration should be given to formal recognition of the training of PCPs in order to assure competence. The expectation that pharmacists should fund their own training is likely to be a barrier to uptake of training and uncertainties over funding will militate against consistency of training.

An analysis of returned medicines in primary care

Objective: The number of pharmaceutical items issued on prescription is continually rising and contributing to spiralling healthcare costs. Although there is some data highlighting the quantity, in terms of weight of medicines returned specifically to community pharmacies, little is known about the specific details of such returns or other destinations for wasted medications. This pilot study has been designed to investigate the types and amounts of medicines returned to both general practices (GPs) and associated local community pharmacies determining the reasons why these medicines have been returned. Method: The study was conducted in eight community pharmacies and five GP surgeries within East Birmingham over a 4-week period. Main outcome Measure: Reason for return and details of returned medication. Results: A total of 114 returns were made during the study: 24 (21.1) to GP surgeries and 90 (78.9) to community pharmacies. The total returns comprised 340 items, of which 42 (12.4) were returned to GPs and 298 (87.6) to pharmacies, with the mean number of items per return being 1.8 and 3.3, respectively. Half of the returns in the study were attributed to the doctor changing or stopping the medicine; 23.7 of returns were recorded as excess supplies or clearout often associated with patients' death and 3.5 of returns were related to adverse drug reactions. Cardiovascular drugs were most commonly returned, amounting to 28.5 of the total drugs returned during the study. Conclusions: The results from this pilot study indicate that unused medicines impose a significant financial burden on the National Health Service as well as a social burden on the United Kingdom population. Further studies are examining the precise nature of returned medicines and possible solutions to these issues. © Springer 2005.

Medicines non-use in primary care

This study expands the current knowledge base on the nature, causes and fate of unused medicines in primary care. Three methodologies were used and participants for each element were sampled from the population of Eastern Birmingham PCT. A detailed assessment was made of medicines returned to pharmacies and GP surgeries for destruction and a postal questionnaire covering medicines use and disposal was used to patients randomly selected from the electoral roll. The content of this questionnaire was informed by qualitative data from a group interview on the subject. By use of these three methods it was possible to triangulate the data, providing a comprehensive assessment of unused medicines. Unused medicines were found to be ubiquitous in primary care and cardiovascular, diabetic and respiratory medicines are unused in substantial quantities, accounting for a considerable proportion of the total financial value of all unused medicines. Additionally, analgesic and psychoactive medicines were highlighted as being unused in sufficient quantities for concern. Anti-infective medicines also appear to be present and unused in a substantial proportion of patients’ homes. Changes to prescribed therapy and non-compliance were identified as important factors leading to the generation of unused medicines. However, a wide array of other elements influence the quantities and types of medicines that are unused including the concordancy of GP consultations and medication reviews and patient factors such as age, sex or ethnicity. Medicines were appropriately discarded by 1 in 3 patients through return to a medical or pharmaceutical establishment. Inappropriate disposal was by placing in household refuse or through grey and black water with the possibility of hoarding or diversion also being identified. No correlations wre found between the weight of unused medicines and any clinical or financial factor. The study has highlighted unused medicines to be an issue of some concern and one that requires further study.