Carla Castrillon Ocampo1, Victoria Garcia-Cardenas2,3, Fernando Martinez-Martinez1, Shalom I Benrimoj4, Pedro Amariles5, Miguel Angel Gastelurrutia1. 1. Grupo de Investigacion en Atencion Farmaceutica, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Granada, Campus de Cartuja s/n, 18071, Granada, Spain. 2. Grupo de Investigacion en Atencion Farmaceutica, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad de Granada, Campus de Cartuja s/n, 18071, Granada, Spain. Victoria.garciacardenas@uts.edu.au. 3. Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, Sydney, NSW, 2007, Australia. Victoria.garciacardenas@uts.edu.au. 4. Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, Sydney, NSW, 2007, Australia. 5. Grupo Promoción y Prevención Farmacéutica, Departamento de Farmacia, Universidad de Antioquia UdeA, Calle 70 No 52-21, Medellín, Colombia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite many research studies demonstrating the benefit in clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes of professional pharmacy services, there is a paucity of evidence when these services become incorporated into the usual practice of a community pharmacy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the clinical, economic, and humanistic impact of a pharmacist-conducted medication review with follow-up following 18 months implementation. SETTING: Community pharmacies in Spain. METHOD: The study used an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design. During the follow-up, patients attended the pharmacy on a monthly basis and received the medication review with follow-up service. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Economic, clinical, and humanistic measures were used to assess the impact of the service. RESULTS: 132 patients received the service. During the 18 months of follow-up, 408 negative outcomes related to medicines (which are uncontrolled health problems) were identified, of which 393 were resolved. The average number of medicines used by patients significantly decreased from 6.1 (SD: 2.9) to 3.3 (SD: 2.2). A significant decrease was also observed in hospitalizations [OR = 0.31 (IC 95% = 0.10-0.99)] and in emergency department visits [OR = 0.16 (IC 95% = 0.05-0.55); p = 0.001]. A general trend to increase all quality of life domains was observed over time. The higher increase was observed in the construct health transition [mean increase: 30.7 (SD: 25.4)], followed by bodily pain [mean increase: 22.3 (SD: 25.4)], and general health [mean increase: 20.7 (SD: 23.7)]. Medication knowledge significantly increased in terms of aggregated domains of dose, frequency, drug indication [from 8.9 (SD: 17.5) to 87.9 (SD: 25.0)], and dose and frequency [from 9.3 (SD: 17.9) to 92.5 (22.1)]. Although a slight improvement was observed in terms of drug indication, this increase was not statistically significant. 68 out of 132 patients (51.5%) were non-adherent to their treatment. This number decreased to 1 (0.8%) after the follow-up [OR = 0.007 (IC 95%: 0.001-0.053) p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: A community pharmacy based medication review with follow-up service delivered by a trained pharmacist, has positive effects across clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes. These results are consistent with previous studies. Incorporating community pharmacists into the multidisciplinary team is a reliable solution to improve health care.
BACKGROUND: Despite many research studies demonstrating the benefit in clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes of professional pharmacy services, there is a paucity of evidence when these services become incorporated into the usual practice of a community pharmacy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to evaluate the clinical, economic, and humanistic impact of a pharmacist-conducted medication review with follow-up following 18 months implementation. SETTING: Community pharmacies in Spain. METHOD: The study used an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design. During the follow-up, patients attended the pharmacy on a monthly basis and received the medication review with follow-up service. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Economic, clinical, and humanistic measures were used to assess the impact of the service. RESULTS: 132 patients received the service. During the 18 months of follow-up, 408 negative outcomes related to medicines (which are uncontrolled health problems) were identified, of which 393 were resolved. The average number of medicines used by patients significantly decreased from 6.1 (SD: 2.9) to 3.3 (SD: 2.2). A significant decrease was also observed in hospitalizations [OR = 0.31 (IC 95% = 0.10-0.99)] and in emergency department visits [OR = 0.16 (IC 95% = 0.05-0.55); p = 0.001]. A general trend to increase all quality of life domains was observed over time. The higher increase was observed in the construct health transition [mean increase: 30.7 (SD: 25.4)], followed by bodily pain [mean increase: 22.3 (SD: 25.4)], and general health [mean increase: 20.7 (SD: 23.7)]. Medication knowledge significantly increased in terms of aggregated domains of dose, frequency, drug indication [from 8.9 (SD: 17.5) to 87.9 (SD: 25.0)], and dose and frequency [from 9.3 (SD: 17.9) to 92.5 (22.1)]. Although a slight improvement was observed in terms of drug indication, this increase was not statistically significant. 68 out of 132 patients (51.5%) were non-adherent to their treatment. This number decreased to 1 (0.8%) after the follow-up [OR = 0.007 (IC 95%: 0.001-0.053) p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: A community pharmacy based medication review with follow-up service delivered by a trained pharmacist, has positive effects across clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes. These results are consistent with previous studies. Incorporating community pharmacists into the multidisciplinary team is a reliable solution to improve health care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Community pharmacy; Drug-related problems; Implementation research; Medication review; Negative outcomes; Pharmaceutical care; Professional pharmacy services; Spain
Authors: Jeannie K Lee; Marion K Slack; Jennifer Martin; Clara Ehrman; Marie Chisholm-Burns Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-06-24 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: M Isabel Baena; M Jose Faus; Paloma C Fajardo; Francisco M Luque; Francisco Sierra; Jose Martinez-Olmos; Andres Cabrera; Fernando Fernandez-Llimos; Fernando Martinez-Martinez; José Jiménez; Antonio Zarzuelo Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2006-04-08 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Amaia Malet-Larrea; Estíbaliz Goyenechea; Victoria García-Cárdenas; Begoña Calvo; Jose M Arteche; Pedro Aranegui; Jose J Zubeldia; Miguel A Gastelurrutia; Fernando Martínez-Martínez; Shalom I Benrimoj Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Aranzazu Noain; Victoria Garcia-Cardenas; Miguel Angel Gastelurrutia; Amaia Malet-Larrea; Fernando Martinez-Martinez; Daniel Sabater-Hernandez; Shalom I Benrimoj Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2017-04-22
Authors: Raquel Varas-Doval; Miguel A Gastelurrutia; Shalom I Benrimoj; Maria Jose Zarzuelo; Victoria Garcia-Cardenas; Beatriz Perez-Escamilla; Fernando Martínez-Martínez Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 2.692