Improving Pharmacists' Targeting of Patients for Medication Review and Deprescription

Weighing the necessities and concerns of deprescribing among older ambulatory patients and primary care trainees: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Deprescribing can be a challenging and complex process, particularly for early career doctors such as primary care trainees. To date, there is limited data from patients' and doctors' perspectives regarding the deprescribing of medications in older persons, particularly from developing countries. This study aimed to explore the necessities and concerns of deprescribing in older persons among older ambulatory patients and primary care trainees.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted among patients and primary care trainees (known henceforth as doctors). Patients aged ≥ 60 years, having ≥ 1 chronic disease and prescribed ≥ 5 medications and could communicate in either English or Malay were recruited. Doctors and patients were purposively sampled based on their stage of training as family medicine specialists and ethnicity, respectively. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic approach was used to analyse data.

RESULTS

Twenty-four in-depth interviews (IDIs) with patients and four focus group discussions (FGDs) with 23 doctors were conducted. Four themes emerged: understanding the concept of deprescribing, the necessity to perform deprescribing, concerns regarding deprescribing and factors influencing deprescribing. Patients were receptive to the idea of deprescribing when the term was explained to them, whilst doctors had a good understanding of deprescribing. Both patients and doctors would deprescribe when the necessity outweighed their concerns. Factors that influenced deprescribing were doctor-patient rapport, health literacy among patients, external influences from carers and social media, and system challenges.

CONCLUSION

Deprescribing was deemed necessary by both patients and doctors when there was a reason to do so. However, both doctors and patients were afraid to deprescribe as they 'didn't want to rock the boat'. Early-career doctors were reluctant to deprescribe as they felt compelled to continue medications that were initiated by another specialist. Doctors requested more training on how to deprescribe medications.

Understanding factors that could influence patient acceptability of the use of the PINCER intervention in primary care: A qualitative exploration using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability

Introduction

Medication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The pharmacist-led IT-based intervention to reduce clinically important medication errors (PINCER) intervention was shown to reduce medication errors when tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial and when implemented across one region of England. Now that it has been rolled out nationally, and to enhance findings from evaluations with staff and stakeholders, this paper is the first to report patients’ perceived acceptability on the use of PINCER in primary care and proposes suggestions on how delivery of PINCER related care could be delivered in a way that is acceptable and not unnecessarily burdensome.

Methods

A total of 46 participants living with long-term health conditions who had experience of medication reviews and/or monitoring were recruited through patient participant groups and social media. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted face-to-face or via telephone. A thematic analysis was conducted and findings mapped to the constructs of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA).

Results

Two themes were identified and interpreted within the most relevant TFA construct: Perceptions on the purpose and components of PINCER (Affective Attitude and Intervention Coherence) and Perceived patient implications (Burden and Self-efficacy). Overall perceptions on PINCER were positive with participants showing good understanding of the components. Access to medication reviews, which PINCER related care can involve, was reported to be limited and a lack of consistency in practitioners delivering reviews was considered challenging, as was lack of communication between primary care and other health-care providers. Patients thought it would be helpful if medication reviews and prescription renewal times were synchronised. Remote medication review consultations were more convenient for some but viewed as a barrier to communication by others. It was acknowledged that some patients may be more resistant to change and more willing to accept changes initiated by general practitioners.

Conclusions

Participants found the concept of PINCER acceptable; however, acceptability could be improved if awareness on the role of primary care pharmacists is raised and patient-pharmacist relationships enhanced. Being transparent with communication and delivering streamlined and consistent but flexible PINCER related care is recommended.

Ethical Tenets of PRN Medicines Management in Healthcare Settings: A Clinical Perspective

Prescription and administration of pro re nata (PRN) medications has remained a poorly discussed area of the international literature regarding ethical tenets influencing this type of medication practice. In this commentary, ethical tenets of PRN medicines management from the clinical perspective based on available international literature and published research have been discussed. Three categories were developed by the authors for summarising review findings as follows: 'benefiting the patient', 'making well-informed decision', and 'follow up assessment' as pre-intervention, through-intervention, and post-intervention aspects, respectively. PRN medicines management is mainly intertwined with the ethical tenets of beneficence, nonmaleficence, dignity, autonomy, justice, informed consent, and error disclosure. It is a dynamic process and needs close collaboration between healthcare professionals especially nurses and patients to prevent unethical practice.

Conceptualising interventions to enhance spread in complex systems: a multisite comprehensive medication review case study

Background

Advancing the description and conceptualisation of interventions in complex systems is necessary to support spread, evaluation, attribution and reproducibility. Improvement teams can provide unique insight into how interventions are operationalised in practice. Capturing this ‘insider knowledge’ has the potential to enhance intervention descriptions.

Objectives

This exploratory study investigated the spread of a comprehensive medication review (CMR) intervention to (1) describe the work required from the improvement team perspective, (2) identify what stays the same and what changes between the different sites and why, and (3) critically appraise the ‘hard core’ and ‘soft periphery’ (HC/SP) construct as a way of conceptualising interventions.

Design

A prospective case study of a CMR initiative across five sites. Data collection included: observations, document analysis and semistructured interviews. A facilitated workshop triangulated findings and measured perceived effort invested in activities. A qualitative database was developed to conduct thematic analysis.

Results

Sites identified 16 intervention components. All were considered essential due to their interdependency. The function of components remained the same, but adaptations were made between and within sites. Components were categorised under four ‘spheres of operation’: Accessibility of evidence base; Process of enactment; Dependent processes and Dependent sociocultural issues. Participants reported most effort was invested on ‘dependent sociocultural issues’. None of the existing HC/SP definitions fit well with the empirical data, with inconsistent classifications of components as HC or SP.

Conclusions

This study advances the conceptualisation of interventions by explicitly considering how evidence-based practices are operationalised in complex systems. We propose a new conceptualisation of ‘interventions-in-systems’ which describes intervention components in relation to their: proximity to the evidence base; component interdependence; component function; component adaptation and effort.

The effect of a structured medication review on quality of life in Parkinson's disease: The study protocol

BACKGROUND

Treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD) is symptomatic and frequently consists of complicated medication regimes. This negatively influences therapy adherence, resulting in lower benefit of treatment, drug related problems and decreased quality of life (QoL). A potential effective intervention strategy is a structured medication review, executed by community pharmacists. However, little is known about the effects on clinical endpoints like QoL, as well as on feasibility and cost-effectiveness in PD patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of a structured medication review on QoL in PD patients. Secondary objectives are measurements of physical disability, activities in daily life, non-motor symptoms, health state, personal carers' QoL and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, a better insight in the process of performing medication reviews will be obtained from the perspective of community pharmacists.

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized controlled trial we aim to enroll 200 PD patients from the outpatient clinic of three Dutch hospitals. Community pharmacists will perform a structured medication review in half of the assigned patients; the other half will receive usual care. Data obtained by use of six validated questionnaires will be collected at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of follow-up. Semi-structured interviews with community pharmacists will be conducted till data saturation has been reached.

DISCUSSION

This trial targets a high-risk patient group for whom optimizing therapy by a structured medication review might be of added value. If effectiveness is proven, this could further promote the implementation of pharmaceutical care in a primary care setting.