Colin Whaley1,2, Ashley Bancsi1,2, Catherine Burns1,2, Kelly Grindrod1,2. 1. School of Pharmacy (Whaley, Bancsi, Grindrod), Faculty of Engineering, Waterloo, Ontario. 2. Faculty of Science and the Department of Systems Design Engineering (Burns), Faculty of Engineering, Waterloo, Ontario.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The indication for a particular medication, or its reason for use (RFU), is important information for prescribers, pharmacists and patients but is not often communicated in writing from prescribers to pharmacists. Adding RFU to a prescription and a medication label would ensure that pharmacists are confident that they are providing high-quality, accurate patient care. This study aims to describe the perspectives of pharmacists on how receiving RFU from prescribers would affect their practice and how pharmacists putting this information on prescriptions would affect patients. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 pharmacists in Southwestern Ontario. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview transcripts, leading to 4 major themes. RESULTS: Pharmacists expressed that RFU should be formatted to ensure that it is of clinical utility via the use of written text and noted that either medical or lay (also known as plain) language would be appropriate for use. Pharmacists indicated that patient privacy should be considered when writing RFU on labels and that patient preference with respect to the addition of RFU should dictate its inclusion on a medication label. Pharmacist access to RFU was universally acknowledged to improve patient safety by providing pharmacists with more information to determine whether the given medication was indicated. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further information about the impact that having access to RFU would have on pharmacy practice and can be used to advocate for the inclusion of RFU information with prescriptions to improve patient outcomes. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2020;153:xx-xx.
BACKGROUND: The indication for a particular medication, or its reason for use (RFU), is important information for prescribers, pharmacists and patients but is not often communicated in writing from prescribers to pharmacists. Adding RFU to a prescription and a medication label would ensure that pharmacists are confident that they are providing high-quality, accurate patient care. This study aims to describe the perspectives of pharmacists on how receiving RFU from prescribers would affect their practice and how pharmacists putting this information on prescriptions would affect patients. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 20 pharmacists in Southwestern Ontario. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview transcripts, leading to 4 major themes. RESULTS: Pharmacists expressed that RFU should be formatted to ensure that it is of clinical utility via the use of written text and noted that either medical or lay (also known as plain) language would be appropriate for use. Pharmacists indicated that patient privacy should be considered when writing RFU on labels and that patient preference with respect to the addition of RFU should dictate its inclusion on a medication label. Pharmacist access to RFU was universally acknowledged to improve patient safety by providing pharmacists with more information to determine whether the given medication was indicated. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further information about the impact that having access to RFU would have on pharmacy practice and can be used to advocate for the inclusion of RFU information with prescriptions to improve patient outcomes. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2020;153:xx-xx.
Authors: Kevin Kron; Sara Myers; Lynn Volk; Aaron Nathan; Pamela Neri; Alejandra Salazar; Mary G Amato; Adam Wright; Sam Karmiy; Sarah McCord; Enrique Seoane-Vazquez; Tewodros Eguale; Rosa Rodriguez-Monguio; David W Bates; Gordon Schiff Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2018-04-19 Impact factor: 2.637
Authors: Michael S Wolf; Terry C Davis; Laura M Curtis; Stacy Cooper Bailey; JoAnn Pearson Knox; Ashley Bergeron; Mercedes Abbet; William H Shrank; Ruth M Parker; Alastair J J Wood Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Marsha A Raebel; Jeanya Charles; Jennifer Dugan; Nikki M Carroll; Eli J Korner; David W Brand; David J Magid Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Pamela M Garabedian; Adam Wright; Isabella Newbury; Lynn A Volk; Alejandra Salazar; Mary G Amato; Aaron W Nathan; Katherine J Forsythe; William L Galanter; Kevin Kron; Sara Myers; Joanna Abraham; Sarah K McCord; Tewodros Eguale; David W Bates; Gordon D Schiff Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-03-01
Authors: Colin Whaley; Ashley Bancsi; Joanne Man-Wai Ho; Catherine M Burns; Kelly Grindrod Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-01-26 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Marijke Peeters; Elias Iturrospe; Dominique Jans; Alexander L N van Nuijs; Hans De Loof Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-09-30 Impact factor: 2.908