Using the Human Factors Framework to understand the origins of medication safety problems in community pharmacy: A qualitative study

Barriers and Facilitators to Medicines Use in Patients With Vision Impairment: A Theory-Informed Qualitative Study of Patients and Caregivers

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies have highlighted numerous challenges with medicines use for patients with vision impairment, but evidence is lacking on interventions to support safe and effective medicine use for this population. This study aimed to identify potential barriers/facilitators of medicines use from the viewpoint of patients/caregivers, to establish a theory-informed foundation for a future intervention.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients with vision impairment and their caregivers in Saudi Arabia. Participants were recruited from low-vision clinics and a non-profit organisation. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) informed the topic guide and served as the theoretical basis for examining participants' behaviours. Interviews explored the barriers/facilitators to obtaining and taking medicines (i.e. the target behaviours). Data were analysed using the framework method and content analysis. Key TDF domains were identified by assessing the relative frequency of themes, the existence of conflicting themes and the perceived theme impact on target behaviours.

RESULTS

Twelve patient/caregiver dyads and 18 individual patients were interviewed. Patients' ages ranged from 19 to 88 years, with 21 females and 9 males. Patients/caregivers demonstrated good knowledge of medicines used, and resourcefulness in finding methods to manage medication use (Domains: 'Knowledge' and 'Skills'). 'Environmental context and resources (ECR)' and 'Social influences' were the two most coded domains. Participants reported the usefulness of several resources including pill organisers and smartphones but described problems with pharmacy environments (Domain: 'ECR'). Caregivers played a major role in assisting patients with medicines. Participants had some positive encounters with pharmacists but reported difficulties in discussing medication issues with them. Many participants had a narrow view of the pharmacist's role (Domain: 'Social influences'). Maintaining a routine was a major facilitator under the 'Memory, attention and decision processes' and 'Behavioural regulation' domains. Six TDF domains were considered 'key' to participants' behaviours.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to utilise a theoretical approach to understand the behaviour of patients with vision impairment in relation to medication use. It provides a comprehensive understanding of the role of caregivers and what influences their own behaviours. Findings will inform the future development of an intervention to support safe and effective medicine use for patients with vision impairment.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

An author met with an administrator at the 'National Association of the Blind' (Kafeef) in Riyadh to enhance the research team's understanding of vision impairment, and the practicality and logistics for identifying and recruiting patients. A draft of the interview guides was piloted with two patients and their caregivers and they were asked for feedback on the questions with amendments made accordingly.

A bibliometric analysis of global trends in the research field of pharmaceutical care over the past 20 years

Pharmaceutical care is essential in building up the basics of public health and clinical care. A comprehensive understanding of global status in the field of pharmaceutical care is necessary for directing its research frontiers and future trends. Therefore, this study aims to make a bibliometric analysis to track the development of pharmaceutical care research worldwide during the past two decades. The publications regarding pharmaceutical care were culled from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). Countries, institutions, authors, journals, references, and keywords in this field were visually analyzed by using VOSviewer (version 1.6.17) and CiteSpace (Version 5.8.R3). As a result, 3,597 publications (3,177 articles and 420 reviews) were obtained. The annual yields grew more than three times in the past two decades, from 54 records in 2002 to 379 papers in 2021. The United States played the leading role in this research from multiple aspects, including publication (n = 1,208), citations (n = 28,759), funding agencies, and collaboration worldwide. The University of Sydney in Australia was the most contributed institution with the greatest number of publications (n = 112) in pharmaceutical care research. Hersberger KE from the University of Basel was the most productive author (n = 40). Chen TF from the University of Sydney was the author who owed the highest H-index of 19 and most citations (n = 1,501). They both significantly impacted this field. American Journal of Health System Pharmacy produced the most publications, while Pharmacotherapy had the highest IF (IF2020 = 4.705) in this field. Clusters networks of co-cited references and keywords suggested that clinical pharmacy is an essential theme in pharmaceutical care. Terms of medication safety and critical care recognized by burst analysis of keywords also hint at the recent attention on clinical pharmacy. The present bibliometrics analysis may provide a comprehensive overview and valuable reference for future researchers and practitioners in the research field of pharmaceutical care.

Cross-sectional study to evaluate burnout among pharmacy staff in Saudi Arabia during COVID-19 pandemic

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Human factors and ergonomics methods for pharmacy research and clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Human factors and ergonomics (HFE) is a scientific and practical human-centered discipline that studies and improves human performance in sociotechnical systems. HFE in pharmacy promotes the human-centered design of systems to support individuals and teams performing medication-related work.

OBJECTIVE

To review select HFE methods well suited to address pharmacy challenges, with examples of their application in pharmacy.

METHODS

We define the scope of HFE methods in pharmacy as applications to pharmacy settings, such as inpatient or community pharmacies, as well as medication-related phenomena such as medication safety, adherence, or deprescribing. We identify and present seven categories of HFE methods suited to widespread use for pharmacy research and clinical practice.

RESULTS

Categories of HFE methods applicable to pharmacy include work system analysis; task analysis; workload assessment; medication safety and error analysis; user-centered and participatory design; usability evaluation; and physical ergonomics. HFE methods are used in three broad phases of human-centered design and evaluation: study; design; and evaluation. The most robust applications of HFE methods involve the combination of HFE methods across all three phases. Two cases illustrate such a comprehensive application of HFE: one case of medication package, label, and information design and a second case of human-centered design of a digital decision aid for medication safety.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacy, including the places where pharmacy professionals work and the multistep process of medication use across people and settings, can benefit from HFE. This is because pharmacy is a human-centered sociotechnical system with an existing tradition of studying and analyzing the present state, designing solutions to problems, and evaluating those solutions in laboratory or practice settings. We conclude by addressing common concerns about the implementation of HFE methods and urge the adoption of HFE methods in pharmacy.

Use of the Delphi technique in pharmacy practice research

Consensus research methods are used in health services research to generate evidence through systematic means of measuring collective agreement and developing consensus from experts of a subject matter. Delphi technique is the most commonly reported consensus research method and is a structured, multistage interaction method to determine consensus using repetitive administration of anonymous questionnaires across two or three rounds. The Delphi technique is increasingly being used in pharmacy practice research. Despite its wide use in the development of statements of policies, guidelines, and performance indicators, there is lack of standardized guidelines and criteria to support the Delphi technique study design, conduct, and reporting, leading to inconsistent approaches and methodological difficulties among researchers. In this themed article, we provide the reader with a collation of best practices and highlight key methodological issues and areas of uncertainty of the Delphi method, especially as it pertains to pharmacy practice research.

Medication safety problems priorities in community pharmacy in Saudi Arabia: a multi-stakeholder Delphi study using the human factors framework

AIM

To achieve multi-stakeholder consensus and prioritisation of medication safety problems in community pharmacies in Saudi Arabia.

DESIGN AND INTERVENTION

A theoretically-underpinned, three-round Delphi study.

SETTING

Saudi Arabia.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients and public (pharmacy users), pharmacy-related professionals (policymakers, academics, medication safety officers and pharmacy owners) and community pharmacists.

METHODS

Round 1 comprised 84 statements derived from a qualitative study. The items were grouped according to the Human Factors Framework (HFF). Rounds 1 and 2 aimed to achieve consensus, 6-point Likert response scale (agreement/disagreement) was used. Round 3 aimed to prioritise the items for which consensus was achieved in Rounds 1 and 2 indicated on a 5-point scale (very important to unimportant). Consensus was predefined as any item that achieved ≥70%.

RESULTS

The number of respondents in Rounds 1, 2 and 3 was 161, 120 and 112, respectively. In all three rounds, the majority of respondents were pharmacy users (Round 1 77% (n=124), Round 2 74% (n=89), Round 3 72% (n=81)). Consensus was achieved with 28/84 items. The top five medication safety priorities were: lack of pharmacy facilities such as counselling area, lack of communication between pharmacists and physicians, lack of patient databases, lack of post-registration pharmacist education and pharmacists' long working hours. The professional and pharmacy user groups achieved consensus on similar items through different categories of the HFFs. Community pharmacists had the highest percentage of consensus among the three groups for factors related to work, such as high workload and low salaries.

CONCLUSION

This multi-stakeholder study used the HFF to identify and prioritise the main medication safety challenges facing community pharmacy in Saudi Arabia. It indicates the need for changes to practice and policy and further research to address these priorities and promote medication safety at an individual, pharmacy and population level.

A literature review of human factors and ergonomics within the pharmacy dispensing process

BACKGROUND

Within healthcare, Human Factors explores the fit between people and their working environment to improve safety, performance and wellbeing. The pharmacy setting is an area of particular interest considering the high-risk nature of the work activities in relation to dispensing errors. Internationally, the pharmacy setting is experiencing significant workforce changes, including the introduction of pharmacy technicians performing accuracy checks, and the adoption of novel technologies such as automated dispensing.

OBJECTIVE

A literature review was conducted to identify studies which have explored the pharmacy dispensing process from a Human Factors perspective.

METHODS

The databases Medline, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched on the 27th of November 2018. All study designs were eligible for inclusion from community and hospital settings. Key study findings were extracted and reported using a descriptive narrative synthesis method.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were identified, with most published from 2010 onwards. The review identified that a myriad of aspects influence safety within the dispensing process; that the dispensing process is complex in nature and can be depicted in many different ways; and lastly, that deviations from intended practice appear commonplace. Most studies used two or more data collection sources, and various theories, models and frameworks were applied. Although the focus of all studies was within the wider domain of Human Factors, 14 studies did not explicitly refer to a Human Factors approach within the manuscript.

CONCLUSIONS

The complexity of the pharmacy dispensing setting suggests that adopting a Human Factors approach to explore this context is appropriate. Future Human Factors research should explore the implementation of new technology and services and focus on obtaining empirical evidence that adopting a Human Factors approach improves safety and/or efficiency within pharmacy practice. Clear guidance on how to apply the range of Human Factors approaches would help support such research and facilitate the development of sound theory.

Pharmacy Education Needs to Address Diagnostic Safety

The American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education, and the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education frame patient safety from the perspective of medication management, which is also the current focus of pharmacy education and training. With the growing appreciation that diagnostic errors represent an urgent and actionable patient safety concern, the National Academy of Medicine has recommended diagnostic safety training for all health care professions. The Society to Improve Diagnosis in Medicine has worked with an interprofessional consensus group to identify a set of 12 key competencies necessary to achieve diagnostic quality and safety that focuses on individual, team-based, and system-related competencies. Much of this already exists in pharmacy education, but pharmacy training programs need to give graduates more guidance on how they contribute to the diagnostic process and the prevention and detection of diagnostic errors. We describe the current state of progress in this regard, and what steps are needed by training programs to provide content and assessment so that graduates achieve the requisite competencies. Governing and advisory bodies need to expand the expectations around patient safety to include diagnostic safety.