A qualitative synthesis of pharmacist, other health professional and lay perspectives on the role of community pharmacy in facilitating care for people with long-term conditions

Implementation of medication reviews in community pharmacy: reaching consensus on stakeholders' recommendations for mechanisms of change using the nominal group technique

BACKGROUND

Since 2022, patients with five or more medicines are eligible for a medication review (MR) in a community pharmacy remunerated by the German health system. However, implementation has been slow, with few pharmacies providing MRs. Stakeholders' input is necessary to detail how implementation strategies can be executed effectively on a national level. Prior research identified "external facilitation" and "altering incentives" as crucial strategies to achieve implementation outcomes.

AIM

To gather stakeholders' recommendations for, and obtain consensus on, mechanisms of change that allow implementation strategies to work in practice.

METHOD

The consensus method used was the nominal group technique (NGT) with NGT-discussions held separately with pharmacy owners and pharmacy chambers employees. Votes were summed and the relative importance (rI) calculated, defined as (score achieved for a mechanism)/(maximum possible score) × 100. Content analysis provided context for the highest ranked mechanisms and allowed linking to implementation outcomes.

RESULTS

Four NGT-discussions were held in 2023 (n = 2 owners; n = 2 chamber employees) with a total of 17 participants. The overall highest ranked mechanisms were fit-for-purpose software (rI = 154.7) detailed process support (rI = 104.9) and an expert support line (rI = 77.7). These together with financial viability (rI = 40.0) were prioritised by both participant groups. Three mechanisms were favoured for both implementation strategies, namely software, process support and materials (rI = 34.3).

CONCLUSION

This study identified stakeholders' priorities for mechanisms of change to implement MRs in community pharmacies. Focusing efforts on the prioritised mechanisms is likely to significantly advance a national implementation plan for countries which are at an early implementation stage.

Community Pharmacists' Role in Reducing the Incidence of Cardiometabolic Adverse Drug Events in Schizophrenia: Insights from Mental Health Professionals

Background and Objectives: Schizophrenia, a debilitating mental illness, is often associated with significant physical health risks. Many second-generation antipsychotics increase the risk of metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular disease. Community pharmacists are highly accessible and could play a role in monitoring cardiometabolic adverse drug events in people with schizophrenia. However, it remains uncertain whether mental health professionals perceive this as valuable. This study aimed to explore the opinions of mental healthcare professionals regarding the role of community pharmacists in reducing the incidence of cardiometabolic adverse events in people with schizophrenia and their integration into a multidisciplinary mental health team. Materials and Methods: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with Australian psychiatrists, mental health nurses and mental health pharmacists. Transcription of the interviews underwent thematic analysis using an inductive approach. Results: Eleven mental healthcare professionals from metropolitan and regional areas across Australia were interviewed, leading to the identification of five overarching themes. These themes encompassed the following aspects: the benefits of community pharmacists' involvement in managing cardiometabolic adverse drug events in people with schizophrenia, improving communication pathways with community pharmacists, defining roles and responsibilities for monitoring cardiometabolic parameters and managing adverse cardiometabolic drug events, fostering collaboration between community pharmacists and mental health care professionals, and recognising the acceptance of community pharmacists' integration within a multidisciplinary team. Mental health professionals believed that community pharmacists could play a role in reducing the incidence of cardiometabolic adverse events in schizophrenia. However, they underscored the need for enhanced communication and collaboration pathways with other healthcare professionals, emphasised the importance of more comprehensive mental health first aid training, and identified potential barriers for community pharmacists such as remuneration, workload, and staff resources. Conclusions: Mental health professionals acknowledged the benefits of incorporating community pharmacists into multidisciplinary teams as a strategy to reduce the incidence of adverse events among individuals with schizophrenia. They recognise the competence of community pharmacists in monitoring cardiometabolic adverse events. However, these professionals have also highlighted specific perceived barriers to the complete integration of community pharmacists within these teams. Notably, there are concerns related to remuneration, staff resources, time constraints, acceptance by other healthcare professionals and patients, and the need for improved communication pathways. Addressing these barriers and providing targeted training could facilitate the valuable inclusion of community pharmacists in the comprehensive care of people with schizophrenia.

Professional and governmental policy on community pharmacy: A 10-year policy review and comparative analysis (2008-2017)

Background

An increased role for community pharmacy might bring considerable value to healthcare systems, for example by relieving workload elsewhere in primary care through the provision of medicines-related services. This requires support from appropriate policy.

Objectives

To explore the representation of community pharmacy in governmental and professional health policies in England (2008-2017) using the Walt and Gilson policy framework.

Methods

Relevant policies were identified using a systematic search. The content of these policies was analysed using thematic analysis. The transparency of evidence use during the policymaking process was scored in four keys areas using a recognised tool: diagnosis; proposal; implementation; testing and evaluation. Key actors involved in the development of each policy were summarised.

Results

18 governmental policies and 7 pharmacy profession policies were included. Convergence between governmental and professional policy content was identified in 6 areas: healthcare workforce; behaviour and collaborations; utilising technology; urgent care; long-term health conditions; service provision. Divergence was identified in 5 areas: enquiry-driven culture; quality in healthcare; cancer care; mental health care; commissioning. Professional policies were less transparent in their use of evidence and had less documentation of the involvement of key actors, such as professionals and the public.

Conclusions

The profession has limited influence and/or representation in governmental policies. This may be because professional policies did not reflect concerns expressed in governmental policies and had low credibility due to limited stakeholder involvement and transparency about evidence use.

Community pharmacists' attitudes towards, and experiences of, providing medication reviews after hospital discharge: a questionnaire survey

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the attitudes and experiences of community pharmacists providing medicines-use review (MUR) and post-discharge medicines-use review (PD-MUR) services.

METHODS

An online survey for community pharmacists who had experience providing the MUR service.

KEY FINDINGS

In total, 495 community pharmacists responded to the survey. A total of 89% (n = 382) of community pharmacists wanted to receive the patient's full discharge summary and 79% (n = 363) preferred electronic communication. Community pharmacists thought they could build trusted relationships with patients and felt that patients were willing to discuss post-discharge medicines-related issues with them. Less experienced pharmacists conducted more MURs than more experienced pharmacists (P = 0.004), and pharmacists working in large multiples (>50 pharmacies) conducted more MURs than those working in independent pharmacies (<5 pharmacies) (P = 0.001). Community pharmacists working in independent pharmacies conducted more PD-MURs than those working in large multiples (P = 0.004). Community pharmacists working in rural areas also thought they were best placed to provide PD-MURs while those working in urban areas thought that practice pharmacists were best suited to provide this service (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Community pharmacists believe they have a vital role in supporting patients after hospital discharge. They can build long-lasting, trusted relationships with patients and patients are willing to discuss medication issues with them. By providing community pharmacists in all locations with timely access to accurate discharge information, they could use their knowledge and skills to better support patients after hospital discharge.

Prescribing error reporting in primary care: a narrative synthesis systematic review

Prescribing errors can cause avoidable harm to patients. Most prescriptions originate in primary care, where medications tend to be self-administered and errors have the most potential to cause harm. Reporting prescribing errors can identify trends and reduce the risk of the reoccurrence of incidents; however, under-reporting is common. The organisation of care and the movement of prescriptions from general practice to community pharmacy may create difficulties for professionals to effectively report errors.

This review aims specifically to identify primary research studies that examine barriers and facilitators to prescription error reporting across primary care. A systematic research of the literature was completed in July 2019. Four databases (PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL and Web of Science) were searched for relevant studies. No date or language limits were applied. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and data were descriptively and narratively synthesised.

Ten articles were included in the final analysis. Seven studies considered prescription errors and error reporting within general practice and three within a community pharmacy setting. Findings from the included studies are presented across five themes, including definition of an error, prescribing error reporting culture, reporting processes, communication and capacity.

Healthcare professionals appreciate the value of prescription error reporting, but there are key barriers to implementation, including time, fear of reprisal and organisation separation within primary care.

Applying a whole systems lens to the general practice crisis: cross-sectional survey looking at usage of community pharmacy services in England by patients with long-term respiratory conditions

OBJECTIVE

UK policy initiatives aiming to extend community pharmacy services to moderate patient demands and to reduce general practitioners' (GPs) workload have had limited success. This study used marketing theory to identify factors that could influence patients to make better use of community pharmacies within the primary care pathway.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional postal survey design applying the '7Ps marketing mix' ('product', 'price', 'place', 'promotion', 'people', 'process' and 'physical evidence').

SETTING

Greater Manchester, England.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease registered at two GP practices.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Patient preference for community pharmacy services.

RESULTS

The response rate was 29% (289/1003). Most respondents preferred to use GP practices for invasive/diagnostic services (product) while preferring using community pharmacy for medicines supply and minor ailments (place). Stronger preference for using GP practices over community pharmacy was significantly associated with gender (male>female), age group (≥65 years) and healthcare services previously accessed at the pharmacy. Respondents perceived they would be more likely to use community pharmacy services if pharmacists offered them enough time to discuss any concerns (73.3%) (price), if community pharmacies had private/clean consultation rooms (70%-73%) (physical evidence) and if pharmacy staff had strong interpersonal skills (68%-70%) (people). Respondents were divided on likelihood of using community pharmacy services if pharmacists could access their whole medical record but wanted pharmacists to add information about their visit (59.6%) (process). Respondents would be encouraged to use community pharmacy for healthcare services if they were offered services by pharmacy staff or recommended/referred to services by their GP (44%) (promotion).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the 7Ps marketing mix highlighted that community pharmacies having staff with strong interpersonal skills, good quality consultation rooms and integrated information systems could positively influence patients to use community pharmacies for management of long-term conditions. There are opportunities for community pharmacies to alleviate GP workload, but a whole system approach will be necessary.

Evaluation of a Collaborative Protocolized Approach by Community Pharmacists and General Medical Practitioners for an Australian Minor Ailments Scheme: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Internationally, governments have been investing in supporting pharmacists to take on an expanded role to support self-care for health system efficiency. There is consistent evidence that minor ailment schemes (MASs) promote efficiencies within the health care system. The cost savings and health outcomes demonstrated in the United Kingdom and Canada open up new opportunities for pharmacists to effect sustainable changes through MAS delivery in Australia.

Objective

This trial aims to evaluate the clinical, economic, and humanistic impact of an Australian Minor Ailments Service (AMAS) compared with usual pharmacy care in a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) in Western Sydney, Australia.

Methods

The cRCT design has an intervention group and a control group, comparing individuals receiving a structured intervention (AMAS) with those receiving usual care for specific health ailments. Participants will be community pharmacies, general practices, and patients located in Western Sydney Primary Health Network (WSPHN) region. A total of 30 community pharmacies will be randomly assigned to either intervention or control group. Each will recruit 24 patients, aged 18 years or older, presenting to the pharmacy in person with a symptom-based or product-based request for one of the following ailments: reflux, cough, common cold, headache (tension or migraine), primary dysmenorrhea, or low back pain. Intervention pharmacists will deliver protocolized care to patients using clinical treatment pathways with agreed referral points and collaborative systems boosting clinician-pharmacist communication. Patients recruited in control pharmacies will receive usual care. The coprimary outcomes are rates of appropriate recommendation of nonprescription medicines and rates of appropriate medical referral. Secondary outcomes include self-reported symptom resolution, health services resource utilization, and EuroQoL Visual Analogue Scale. Differences in primary outcomes between groups will be analyzed at the individual patient level accounting for correlation within clusters with generalized estimating equations. The economic impact of the model will be evaluated by cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis compared with usual care.

Results

The study began in July 2018. Thirty community pharmacies were recruited. Pharmacists from the 15 intervention pharmacies were trained. A total of 27 general practices consented. Pharmacy patient recruitment began in August 2018 and was completed on March 31, 2019.

Conclusions

This study may demonstrate the efficacy of a protocolized intervention to manage minor ailments in the community and will assess the clinical, economic, and humanistic impact of this intervention in Australian pharmacy practice. Pharmacists supporting patient self-care and appropriate self-medication may contribute to greater efficiency of health care resources and integration of self-care in the health system. The proposed model and developed educational content may form the basis of a national MAS service in Australia, using a robust framework for management and referral for common ailments.

Trial Registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12618000286246; http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12618000286246.aspx

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/13973

Community pharmacy integration within the primary care pathway for people with long-term conditions: a focus group study of patients', pharmacists' and GPs' experiences and expectations

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to use marketing theory to examine the views of patients, pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs) on how community pharmacies are currently used and to identify how community pharmacy services may be better integrated within the primary care pathway for people with long-term conditions (LTCs).

METHODS

A qualitative research design was used. Two focus groups were conducted with respiratory patients (n = 6, 5) and two with type 2 diabetes patients (both n = 5). Two focus groups were held with pharmacists (n = 7, 5) and two with GPs (both n = 5). The "7Ps marketing mix" ("product", "price", "place", "promotion", "people", "process", "physical evidence") was used to frame data collection and analysis. Data was analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Due to the access and convenience of community pharmacies ("place"), all stakeholder groups recommended using community pharmacies over GP practices for services such as management of minor ailments, medication reviews and routine check-ups for well managed LTCs ("product"). All stakeholder groups preferred pharmacy services with clear specifications which focused on specific interventions to reduce variability in service delivery and quality ("process"). However, all stressed the importance of having an appropriate system to share relevant information, allowing pharmacists and GPs two-way flow ("process"). Pharmacists and GPs mentioned difficulties in collaborating with each other due to inter-professional tensions arising from funding conflicts, which leads to duplication of services and inefficient workflow within the primary care pathway ("people"). Patients and GPs were sometimes doubtful of community pharmacies' potential to expand services due to limited space, size and poor quality consultation rooms ("physical evidence"). However, all stakeholder groups recommended promoting community pharmacy services locally and nationally ("promotion"). Patients felt the most effective form of promotion was first-hand experience of high quality pharmacy services and peer word-of-mouth. The added value of using pharmacy services was faster access and convenience for patients, and freeing up GPs' time to focus on more complex patients ("value").

CONCLUSIONS

Using the 7Ps marketing mix highlighted factors which could influence utilisation and integration of community pharmacy services within the primary care pathway for patients with LTCs. Further research is needed to identify their relative importance.