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.

The Evolution of Pharmaceutical Care for Drug Misusers

This survey was funded by a grant from the Chief Scientist Office (CSO), Grant No: CZH/4/998.

The Evolution of Pharmaceutical Care for Drug Misusers

This survey was funded by a grant from the Chief Scientist Office (CSO), Grant No: CZH/4/998.

Community pharmacists’ understanding, attitudes, practice and perceived barriers related to providing pharmaceutical care: a questionnaire-based survey in Macao

Purpose: To explore the knowledge, attitudes, practice and perceived barriers of community pharmacists regarding provision of pharmaceutical care as well as provide recommendations on how to advance the service during the early stage of development in Macao. Methods: A questionnaire comprising 10 items was used to collect respondents’ demographic information and to evaluate their understanding of pharmaceutical care, attitude towards service provision, current practice and perceived barriers. Descriptive and comparative analysis of the results was conducted. Results: While 95 % of the participating pharmacists agreed that patients’ health was their primary responsibility, only 57 % believed that they can provide better pharmaceutical care in the future. The majority spent most of their work time counselling patients (90 %) and checking prescription (70 %). Only a small portion monitored adverse drug reaction and drug compliance (44 %), engaged in health screening or drug safety promotion (20 %) or maintained patient medication records (4 %). Insufficient communication with physicians (90 %), lack of time (79 %) and lack of physical space at the pharmacy (76 %) were considered the most significant barriers. Conclusion: A suboptimal level of pharmaceutical care is provided by pharmacists in Macao. Considering the barriers identified and integrating other country experiences, establishing an enabling atmosphere using policy and regulatory measures is the fundamental element for advancing pharmaceutical care by community pharmacists.

Pharmaceutical review - Queensland Health’s experience

In 1990 Charles Hepler and Linda Strand published a sentinel paper and coined the term ‘Pharmaceutical Care’. This was defined as ‘that component of pharmacy practice which entails the direct interaction of the pharmacist with the patient for the purpose of caring for that patient’s drug-related needs’.1 In 1996 the Regional Pharmaceutical Officers’ Statement of Principles and Standards of Good Practice for Hospital Pharmacy in the UK stated that ‘All patients will receive the medicines to meet their agreed therapeutic objectives throughout the course of their treatment. This requires that the care plan for each patient identifies the correct choice of medication and is supported by systems for the provision of medicines…’

Using a problem detection study (PDS) to identify and compare health care provider and consumer views of antihypertensive therapy

The objectives of this study were to ascertain consumer knowledge and behaviour about hypertension and treatment and to compare these with health care providers' perceptions (of 'most' consumers). The design for the study was a problem detection study (PDS): focus groups and then survey. Focus groups and survey participants were convenience samples of consumers, doctors, nurses and pharmacists. The main outcome measures were agreement on a 5-point Likert scale with statements about consumers' knowledge and behaviour about high blood pressure and medication. The survey identified areas of consensus and disagreement between consumers and health providers. While general knowledge and concordance with antihypertensive therapy among consumers was good, consequences such as eye and kidney disease, interactions with herbal medicines, and how to deal with missing a dose were less well known. Side effects were a problem for over one-quarter of participants, and cost was a problem in continuing therapy. Half the consumers had not received sufficient written information. Providers overall disagreed that most consumers have an adequate understanding of the condition. They agreed that most consumers adhere to therapy and can manage medicines; and about their own profession's role in information provision and condition management. Consumers confirmed positive provider behaviour, suggesting opportunities for greater communication between providers about actions taken with their consumers. In conclusion, the PDS methodology was useful in identifying consumer opinions. Differences between consumer and provider responses were marked, with consumers generally rating their knowledge and behaviour above providers' ratings of 'most' consumers. There are clear gaps to be targeted to improve the outcomes of hypertension therapy.

Dispensing doctor : an underutilise resource?

Introduction Multidisciplinary models of organising and providing care have been proposed to decrease the health services gap between urban and rural populations but health workforce shortages exist across most professions and are further exacerbated by maldistribution. Flexibility and expansion of the range of tasks that a health professional can undertake were proposed. Dispensing doctors (DDs) are such an example. As part of DDs’ routine medical practice, DDs are able to both prescribe and dispense medicines to their patients. The granting of a dispensing licence to a doctor is intended to improve rural community access to medicines where there is no pharmacy within a reasonable distance. Method An iterative, qualitative descriptive methodology was used to identify factors which influenced DDs’ practice. Qualitative data were collected by in-depth face-to-face and telephone interviews with DDs. A combination of processes: qualitative content analysis and constant comparison were used to analyse the interview transcripts thematically. Member checking and separate coding were utilised to ensure rigour. Result Thirty-one interviews were conducted. The respondents universally acknowledged that the main reason for dispensing were for the convenience and benefits of their patients and to ensure continuity of care. DDs’ communities were generally more isolated and smaller when compared to their non-dispensing counterparts. DD-respondents viewed their dispensary as a service to the community. Peer pressure on prescribing was a key factors in self-regulating prescribing and dispensing. Conclusion DDs fulfill an important area of unmet needs by providing continuity of pharmaceutical care but the practice is hindered by significant barriers

A pilot study to assess the appropriateness of prescribing from a collaborative pharmacist prescribing study in a surgical pre admission clinic

Background Current evidence to support non-medical prescribing is predominantly qualitative, with little evaluation of appropriateness. This study aims to evaluate the appropriateness of prescribing, and significance of omissions, from a doctor pharmacist collaborative prescribing model in an elective surgery pre admission clinic (PAC). Method A modified version of the Medication Appropriate Index (MAI) was developed, piloted and subsequently used by an expert panel, comprised of a surgeon, anaesthetist, clinical pharmacologist, pharmacist, resident medical officer (RMO) and clinical nurse. The tool was used to rate the appropriateness of prescribing of medications, and the significance of omissions in a 5% sample (N=19) of the total cohort from a randomised, controlled two arm trial of doctor-pharmacist collaborative prescribing. Results When reviewer assessments were combined, 32 out of 294 (10.9%) medications assessed for appropriateness in the control arm were classed as inappropriate, compared to 13 of 266 (4.9%) in the intervention arm. Out of 89 regular medications in the control arm, 25 (28%) were omitted from the medication charts, compared to 1 out of 55 (2%) in the intervention arm (p<0.001, fishers exact) On average, 52% of omissions in the control arm were judged to have potential for patient harm or ward inconvenience. Conclusion For the appropriateness of prescribing, overall results were similar between arms, as judged by individual panel members. Medication charts in the control arm contained significantly more omissions than in the intervention arm, a number of which were rated by the panel members as having the potential for patient harm or ward inconvenience.

Good for the environment good for health

“First do no harm”. This phrase, attributed to the 19th century surgeon, Thomas Inman, 1 reflects an equivalent phrase found in Epidemics, Book I of the Hippocratic School, “Practise two things in your dealings with disease: either help or do not harm the patient”. Pharmacists have played, and continue to play, an important role in reducing patient harm from medication misadventures. Now, they have a new role to play. The delivery of pharmaceutical care contributes to climate change (e.g. through the embedded carbon in the manufacture and distribution of medicines, disposal of waste, and energy and water use),2 which in turn has a negative impact on health. 3,4 This paradox argues a moral and ethical obligation by pharmacists, to deliver pharmaceutical care more sustainably – do no harm. Sustainability “…. is concerned, on one hand, with resources and how we can preserve them, and, on the other hand, with waste products and how we can best reduce or dispose of them.” 5(p.37) It is about preserving and nurturing Earth’s resources and systems for this generation and future generations to enjoy. Pharmacists play an important role in preventative health strategies such as smoking cessation, promotion of healthier lifestyles and vaccination/immunisation programmes and have the potential to also play a significant role in delivering pharmaceutical care more sustainably. Sustainable pharmaceutical care may be considered a virtuous cycle - what is good for the environment is also good for our health. 5 The good news for community pharmacy owners and managers is that implementing sustainability initiatives in the pharmacy can also have significant financial co-benefits.

Atención Farmacéutica

115 diapositivas.