Qualitative Exploration of Pharmacists' Feedback Following the Implementation of an "Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP)" in Australian Community Pharmacies

Collaborative and integrated working between general practice and community pharmacies: A realist review of what works, for whom, and in which contexts

OBJECTIVES

Collaborative and integrated (C + I) working between general practice and community pharmacies has the potential to increase accessibility to services, improve service efficiency and quality of care, and reduce health care expenditures. Many existing studies report challenges and complexities inherent in establishing effective C + I ways of working. The aim of our review is to understand how, when and why working arrangements between General Practitioners (GP) and Community Pharmacists (CP) can provide the conditions necessary for effective communication, decision-making, and C + I working.

METHODS

We conducted a realist review to explore the key contextual factors and mechanisms through which GP-CP C + I working may be achieved. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, IBSS, ASSIA, Sociological Abstracts, Sociology Database and the King's Fund Library Database were searched for articles and grey literature published between January 2000 and April 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 136 documents were included in the final synthesis. Our findings highlight the importance of mutually beneficial remuneration models to support effective integration of services; supportive organisational cultures and values; flexible and agile IT systems/technologies; adequate physical infrastructure and space design to support multidisciplinary teamworking; the importance of establishing patient's trust in collaborative processes between GP-CP; and the need to acknowledge, support and utilise effective triadic relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Our research generates new insights regarding how, why and in which contexts C + I working can be achieved between GPs and CPs. The findings of our review can be used to inform future policy, research and clinical practice guidelines for designing and delivering C + I care.

The effectiveness of pharmacist-led educational model in adult patients with allergic rhinitis: a single-center randomized control trial protocol (AR-PRISE RCT)

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis is a chronic respiratory disorder that significantly impacts patients' quality of life (QoL) and work performance. Pharmacists are recognized as suitable professionals to provide patient education and pharmaceutical care for managing allergic rhinitis patients. However, local clinical practice guidelines, particularly regarding pharmaceutical care in public healthcare institutions, are lacking. This study protocol outlines a randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led educational model (AR-PRISE Model) in managing allergic rhinitis in adult patients compared to standard pharmaceutical care. The AR-PRISE model delivers patient educational material and a pharmaceutical care algorithm.

METHOD

This is a 6-month, single-center, prospective, randomized, two-arm, and parallel-group controlled trial. The trial recruits patients attending the otorhinolaryngology clinics of a tertiary referral hospital. Participants are randomized into control or intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio using permuted block randomization. The total number of participants estimated is 154, with each group requiring 77 participants. The control group receives standard pharmaceutical care, while the intervention group receives pharmacist-led education according to the AR-PRISE model. Both groups are assessed for middle turbinate endoscopy findings, disease severity, knowledge level, symptom control, medication adherence, and QoL at baseline and the end-of-study follow-up (day 180 ± 7). Depending on feasibility, intermediate follow-ups are conducted on days 60 ± 7 and 120 ± 7, either virtually or face-to-face. During intermediate follow-ups, participants are assessed for symptom control, medication adherence, and QoL. The intention-to-treat analysis includes all participants assigned to each group. An independent T-test compares the mean difference in knowledge level between the two groups. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA analysis is employed to determine between-group differences for scores of symptom control, adherence rate, and QoL. A P-value < 0.05 is considered statistically significant.

DISCUSSION

This study protocol will provide a framework for conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of pharmacist-led education intervention in managing allergic rhinitis within public healthcare settings. The parameters measured in this trial will quantify outcomes associated with improvements in symptoms and QoL. By systematically assessing these outcomes, we aim to contribute valuable insights into the role of pharmacist-led interventions in enhancing the management of allergic rhinitis in public healthcare settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06027736 . Registered on 9 July 2023-retrospectively registered.

The impact of implementing an allergic rhinitis clinical management pathway (AR-CMaP) in the community pharmacy

Background

The Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP) was developed to overcome the challenge of implementing current AR guidelines in the Australian community pharmacy practice and support pharmacists in optimally managing patients' AR.

Objectives

To evaluate the impact of AR-CMaP on patients' behaviour and pharmacists' needs in managing AR in the pharmacy.

Methods

This study used a cross-sectional, pre-post study design in which the primary outcome was the appropriateness of medications purchased from community pharmacies in Australia. Patient data were collected before and after the implementation of AR-CMaP. Pharmacist needs were recorded before and after AR-CMaP training. Data were analysed descriptively.

Results

Six pharmacies, 19 pharmacists and a total of 416 patients were included in the study; 206 pre-AR-CMaP implementation and 210 post-AR-CMaP implementation. Pre-AR-CMaP, 22.4% of patients purchased appropriate AR medication compared with 29.0% post-AR-CMaP implementation. Over half the patient cohort (52%) consulted a pharmacist pre-AR-CMaP and 37% consulted a pharmacist post-AR-CMaP implementation. Post-AR-CMaP, pharmacists reported increased awareness of barriers such as patients' lack of time, patients' perceptions about the pharmacist's role and patient choice to self-manage. Pharmacists also rated an increased desire to interact with other health care providers (HCPs) in caring for patients with AR.

Conclusions

While there was a non-statistically significant increase in the proportion of patients purchasing optimal AR medication, AR-CMaP did empower patients to self-select their own medication without further detriment. Moreover, following the implementation of AR-CMaP, pharmacists developed a greater awareness of their role in AR management, exemplified by their increased desire to be actively involved in AR management and increased interaction with other HCPs. Future research needs to explore more effective tools to support pharmacists' clinical decision-making and target patients' self-selection of AR medications. This study highlights that there is an ingrained self-reliance of AR decision-making that has become a habit for people living with AR.

Qualitative Exploration of Pharmacists' Feedback Following the Implementation of an "Allergic Rhinitis Clinical Management Pathway (AR-CMaP)" in Australian Community Pharmacies

Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is both a common and high burden disease, with the majority of AR sufferers purchasing suboptimal/inappropriate AR medication from community pharmacies. Unfortunately, it is still a challenge to translate the AR management guidelines that are available at both a global and national level into practice. This study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of community pharmacists with regards to the implementation of AR management guidelines in real-life everyday practice. This exploration took the form of a qualitative research study in which pharmacists were interviewed following the implementation of a guideline-driven AR management pathway in their pharmacies. Fifteen pharmacists from six pharmacies agreed to participate in a telephone interview. Five themes were identified that encompassed the sentiment of the pharmacists during the interviews: 1) impact of training on pharmacists' approach to patients and AR management recommendations; 2) patient engagement and the importance of appropriate tools; 3) patient barriers to change in practice; 4) physical, logistical, and inter-professional barriers to change within the pharmacy environment; and 5) recommendations for improvement. The results of this study indicate that, following the implementation of an AR management pathway, pharmacists believe that their interactions with patients around their AR were enhanced through the use of appropriate tools and education. However, if optimal AR management is to be delivered within the community pharmacy setting, the undertaking needs to be collaborative with both pharmacy assistants and general practitioners.