Maarit S Dimitrow1, Saija N Leikola2, Sirkka-Liisa Kivelä3, Sanna Passi4, Pirjo Lukkari5, Marja S A Airaksinen2. 1. Clinical Pharmacy Group, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Finland maarit.dimitrow@helsinki.fi. 2. Clinical Pharmacy Group, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Finland. 3. Clinical Pharmacy Group, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Helsinki, Finland Institute of Clinical Medicine, Department of Family Medicine, University of Turku, Unit of Family Medicine, Turku University Hospital and Satakunta Hospital District, Finland. 4. Palmenia Centre for Continuing Education, University of Helsinki, Finland. 5. The Finnish Union of Practical Nurses, Finland.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate feasibility of a practical nurse-administered Drug-related Problem Risk Assessment Tool among home care clients ⩾65 years. METHODS: Altogether, 36 practical nurses participated in the study. They were trained about the purpose and use of the tool. The training consisted of a day long interactive workshop and involved reviewing four self-selected clients' medications using the tool (one as a pre-assignment before and three as post-assignments after the workshop). The data of this study were collected during the training. Triangulation, i.e. combination of methods and data, was used to evaluate the feasibility of the tool. Quantitative data were gathered from returned post-assignment tools and qualitative data from face-to-face discussions and open questions in feedback forms the practical nurses returned after the training. RESULTS: Practical nurses spent 10-45 minutes reviewing one client's medication using the tool (mean 20±8). They identified reliably 88% of the risk medicines used by the clients listed in the tool. Of the respondents (n=23) of the feedback forms, 43% reported that they felt it easy or quite easy to answer the questions of the tool. Generic names of medicines, time constraints, home-care workers'/client's lack of interest to client's pharmacotherapy and short client contacts were the most common barriers to use the tool. CONCLUSIONS: The Drug-Related Problem Risk Assessment Tool turned out to be feasible among practical nurses. The brief training on the content and use of the tool seems to be sufficient for ensuring reliable use of the tool.
AIM: To evaluate feasibility of a practical nurse-administered Drug-related Problem Risk Assessment Tool among home care clients ⩾65 years. METHODS: Altogether, 36 practical nurses participated in the study. They were trained about the purpose and use of the tool. The training consisted of a day long interactive workshop and involved reviewing four self-selected clients' medications using the tool (one as a pre-assignment before and three as post-assignments after the workshop). The data of this study were collected during the training. Triangulation, i.e. combination of methods and data, was used to evaluate the feasibility of the tool. Quantitative data were gathered from returned post-assignment tools and qualitative data from face-to-face discussions and open questions in feedback forms the practical nurses returned after the training. RESULTS: Practical nurses spent 10-45 minutes reviewing one client's medication using the tool (mean 20±8). They identified reliably 88% of the risk medicines used by the clients listed in the tool. Of the respondents (n=23) of the feedback forms, 43% reported that they felt it easy or quite easy to answer the questions of the tool. Generic names of medicines, time constraints, home-care workers'/client's lack of interest to client's pharmacotherapy and short client contacts were the most common barriers to use the tool. CONCLUSIONS: The Drug-Related Problem Risk Assessment Tool turned out to be feasible among practical nurses. The brief training on the content and use of the tool seems to be sufficient for ensuring reliable use of the tool.