Mary Madden1, Stephanie Morris2, Karl Atkin2, Brendan Gough3, Jim McCambridge2. 1. Department of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK. Electronic address: mary.madden@york.ac.uk. 2. Department of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK. 3. School of Social Sciences, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This paper reports on a qualitative study which formed part of the intervention development phase of a five year research programme (Community pharmacy: Highlighting Alcohol use in Medication aPpointments; CHAMP-1). OBJECTIVES: To better understand patient views on the appropriateness of alcohol as a subject for discussion in medication reviews in community pharmacy. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of 25 people eligible for medication reviews whose AUDIT-C screening scores identified them as likely risky drinkers. Transcripts were analysed using a modified framework method with a constructionist thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Most patients interviewed said they were open to the idea of a medication and alcohol linked discussion with a pharmacist if this was routine, well-conducted and confidential. Such a discussion was thought less personally relevant for those who viewed the proposed intervention through the prism of a particular set of ideas about the nature of alcohol problems, which distanced them from thinking about alcohol in terms of their everyday life and possible impacts on their health. Study findings attest to some of the sensitivities involved in discussion of alcohol, and the complexities inherent in helping people to talk about their own drinking, medicine use and health. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were open to the idea of discussing alcohol with community pharmacists in the context of a medicines review if this was sensitively done and the relevance was clear to them.
BACKGROUND: This paper reports on a qualitative study which formed part of the intervention development phase of a five year research programme (Community pharmacy: Highlighting Alcohol use in Medication aPpointments; CHAMP-1). OBJECTIVES: To better understand patient views on the appropriateness of alcohol as a subject for discussion in medication reviews in community pharmacy. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a sample of 25 people eligible for medication reviews whose AUDIT-C screening scores identified them as likely risky drinkers. Transcripts were analysed using a modified framework method with a constructionist thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Most patients interviewed said they were open to the idea of a medication and alcohol linked discussion with a pharmacist if this was routine, well-conducted and confidential. Such a discussion was thought less personally relevant for those who viewed the proposed intervention through the prism of a particular set of ideas about the nature of alcohol problems, which distanced them from thinking about alcohol in terms of their everyday life and possible impacts on their health. Study findings attest to some of the sensitivities involved in discussion of alcohol, and the complexities inherent in helping people to talk about their own drinking, medicine use and health. CONCLUSIONS:Patients were open to the idea of discussing alcohol with community pharmacists in the context of a medicines review if this was sensitively done and the relevance was clear to them.
Authors: Michelle Watson; Anne van Dongen; Catherine Hewitt; Laura Mandefield; Duncan Stewart; Judith Watson; Jim McCambridge Journal: F1000Res Date: 2020-08-25
Authors: Mary Madden; Stephanie Morris; Duncan Stewart; Karl Atkin; Brendan Gough; Thomas Mills; Jim McCambridge Journal: SSM Qual Res Health Date: 2021-12
Authors: Ranjita Dhital; Rachel Coleman; Ed Day; Colin Drummond; Anne Lingford-Hughes; John Marsden; Tom Phillips; Julia Sinclair; John Strang; John Weinman; Cate Whittlesea; Kideshini Widyaratna; Kim Donoghue Journal: Alcohol Alcohol Date: 2022-09-10 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Mary Madden; Steph Morris; Margaret Ogden; David Lewis; Duncan Stewart; Jim McCambridge Journal: Health Expect Date: 2020-03-31 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Duncan Stewart; Anne van Dongen; Michelle Watson; Laura Mandefield; Karl Atkin; Ranjita Dhital; Brent Foster; Brendan Gough; Catherine Hewitt; Mary Madden; Stephanie Morris; Ronan O'Carroll; Margaret Ogden; Steve Parrott; Judith Watson; Sue White; Cate Whittlesea; Jim McCambridge Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 2.655