PINCER trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmacist-led IT-based intervention with simple feedback in reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices

Background: Medication errors in general practice are an important source of potentially preventable morbidity and mortality. Building on previous descriptive, qualitative and pilot work, we sought to investigate the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and likely generalisability of a complex pharm acist-led IT-based intervention aiming to improve prescribing safety in general practice. Objectives: We sought to: • Test the hypothesis that a pharmacist-led IT-based complex intervention using educational outreach and practical support is more effective than simple feedback in reducing the proportion of patients at risk from errors in prescribing and medicines management in general practice. • Conduct an economic evaluation of the cost per error avoided, from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS). • Analyse data recorded by pharmacists, summarising the proportions of patients judged to be at clinical risk, the actions recommended by pharmacists, and actions completed in the practices. • Explore the views and experiences of healthcare professionals and NHS managers concerning the intervention; investigate potential explanations for the observed effects, and inform decisions on the future roll-out of the pharmacist-led intervention • Examine secular trends in the outcome measures of interest allowing for informal comparison between trial practices and practices that did not participate in the trial contributing to the QRESEARCH database. Methods Two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial of 72 English general practices with embedded economic analysis and longitudinal descriptive and qualitative analysis. Informal comparison of the trial findings with a national descriptive study investigating secular trends undertaken using data from practices contributing to the QRESEARCH database. The main outcomes of interest were prescribing errors and medication monitoring errors at six- and 12-months following the intervention. Results: Participants in the pharmacist intervention arm practices were significantly less likely to have been prescribed a non-selective NSAID without a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) if they had a history of peptic ulcer (OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.38, 0.89), to have been prescribed a beta-blocker if they had asthma (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58, 0.91) or (in those aged 75 years and older) to have been prescribed an ACE inhibitor or diuretic without a measurement of urea and electrolytes in the last 15 months (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34, 0.78). The economic analysis suggests that the PINCER pharmacist intervention has 95% probability of being cost effective if the decision-maker’s ceiling willingness to pay reaches £75 (6 months) or £85 (12 months) per error avoided. The intervention addressed an issue that was important to professionals and their teams and was delivered in a way that was acceptable to practices with minimum disruption of normal work processes. Comparison of the trial findings with changes seen in QRESEARCH practices indicated that any reductions achieved in the simple feedback arm were likely, in the main, to have been related to secular trends rather than the intervention. Conclusions Compared with simple feedback, the pharmacist-led intervention resulted in reductions in proportions of patients at risk of prescribing and monitoring errors for the primary outcome measures and the composite secondary outcome measures at six-months and (with the exception of the NSAID/peptic ulcer outcome measure) 12-months post-intervention. The intervention is acceptable to pharmacists and practices, and is likely to be seen as costeffective by decision makers.

Introduction: special issue on advances in brand management

This special issue of the Journal of Business Research contains 13 articles presented at the Spring 2007 Thought Leaders International Conference on Brand Management. Following a blind reviewing process 69 papers were presented at the conference then authors were invited to revise their papers for inclusion consideration for this special issue. A further round of blind reviewing resulted in the selection of those 13 articles. This introduction presents a review of the research into brand management.

Expectation versus provision in the management and use of urban open space

This paper discusses the implications of the shifting cultural significance of public open space in urban areas. In particular, it focuses on the increasing dysfunction between people's expectations of that space and its actual provision and management. In doing so, the paper applies Lefebvre's ideas of spatiality to the evident paradigm shift from 'public' to 'private' culture, with its associated commodification of previously public space. While developing the construct of paradigm shift, the paper recognises that the former political notions inherent in the provision of public space remain in evidence. So whereas public parks were formerly seen as spaces of confrontation between the 'rationality' of public order as the 'irrationality' of individual leisure pursuits, they are now increasingly seen, particularly 'out of hours', as the domain of the dispossessed, to be defined and policed as 'dangerous'. Where once people were welcomed into public open spaces as a means of 'educating' them in good, acceptable, leisure practices, therefore, they are now increasingly excluded, but for the same ostensible reasons. Building on survey work undertaken in Reading, Berkshire, the paper illustrates how communities can become separated from 'their' space, leaving them with the overriding impression that they have been 'short-changed' in terms of both the provision and the management of urban open space. Rather than the intimacy of local space for local people, therefore, the paper argues that parks have become externalised places, increasingly responding to commercial definitions of culture and what is 'public'. Central urban open spaces are therefore increasingly becoming sites of stratification, signification of a consumer-constructed citizenship and valorisation of public life as a legitimate element of the market surface of town and city centres.