Search

Background: Non-medical medication switches, a change to another medicine or medication label not motivated by medical reasons, occur frequently. Switches often lead to negative patient emotions, such as confusion and anger. Pharmacy staff's communication, i.e. delivering the message and addressing patients' emotions is crucial, but experienced as difficult., Objective: To develop and test a communication training for the pharmacy team to facilitate medication switch conversations., Methods: A communication training was developed based on the 'breaking bad news model' and 'positive message framing' strategies, and incorporating needs and preferences from practice. The training consisted of an e-learning with theory and reflective exercises, a half-day live training session, and an online reflection session. The Kirkpatrick training evaluation model (levels one 'reaction' and two 'learning') was used to evaluate the training. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and interview data was transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically., Results: Twelve pharmacists and 27 pharmacy technicians from 15 Dutch pharmacies participated in the training. According to Kirkpatrick's model level one, the major learning outcome was to give space to patients to express their emotions and/or concerns (e.g. more silences in the conversations). For level two, most participants valued practicing the conversations, role-playing, and receiving feedback. The majority of the participants indicated that they had sufficient tools and practice during the live training to apply the strategies in daily practice. A few participants still needed time and practice, or missed examples to apply the strategies., Conclusion: The communication training based on the two strategies was well-received and participants felt well-equipped post-training. The take-away for participants was to give space to patients to express their emotions. Using these strategies and skills, pharmacy teams can tailor their medication counseling to patients' emotions and concerns during non-medical medication switches to better support patients in proper medication use., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Readmission to primary care is challenging for patients due to involvement of multiple healthcare providers across different settings and implementing new medicines into their daily routine. Elucidating patients' needs is crucial to tailor counseling support., Objective: To explore the patient perspectives on implementing a newly prescribed cardiovascular medicine into their daily routine at readmission to primary care., Methods: A qualitative study was performed within the outpatient pharmacy. Adult patients who were prescribed a new cardiovascular medicine by their treating hospital physician at hospital discharge or during an outpatient clinic visit were eligible to participate. Purposive sampling was applied to equally distribute adherence-influencing factors. Patients were interviewed by telephone and inclusion continued until theoretical data saturation. An adapted Greenhalgh framework for implementation research was used for a thematic content analysis by conceptualizing the new medicine as an innovation that requires implementation by a patient (adopter)., Results: Data saturation was reached at 44 patients of which 19 discontinued their new medicine at the time of the interview. Reasons for discontinuing included: side-effects, insufficient efficacy or negligence. Patients considered a lack of basic knowledge on their newly prescribed cardiovascular medicine as a major barrier for adopting it into their daily routine. They were in need of information on risks and benefits of their new medicine. A noticeable effect and tailored counseling facilitated patients in taking their medicine as prescribed. Patients mentioned personalized organizing tools and routinization of medication intake as important success factors for addressing their practical challenges with their new medicine., Conclusions: By applying the adapted Greenhalgh framework, this study provided a unique and structured insight in patients' barriers and facilitators that could influence their ability to implement a new cardiovascular medicine at readmission to primary care. This knowledge enables pharmacists to tailor their patient support and provide individualized patient counseling., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Community pharmacists are in the position to contribute to fall prevention, but this is not yet common practice., Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of a community pharmacy-based fall prevention service., Methods: A fall prevention service, consisting of a fall risk screening and assessment including a medication review, was implemented in pharmacies during three months. A preparative online training was provided to the pharmacy team to enhance adoption of the service. Included patients were aged ≥70 years, using ≥5 drugs of which ≥1 fall risk-increasing drug. The implementation process was quantitively assessed by registering medication adaptations, recommendations, and referrals. Changes in patient scores on the Short Fall Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I) and a fall prevention knowledge test were documented at one month follow-up. Implementation was qualitatively evaluated by conducting semi-structured interviews with pharmacists before and after the project, based on the consolidated framework of implementation research., Results: The service was implemented in nine pharmacies and 91 consultations were performed. Medication was adapted of 32 patients. Patients' short FES-I scores were significantly higher at follow-up (p = 0.047) and patients' knowledge test scores did not differ (p = 0.86). Pharmacists experienced the following barriers: lack of time, absence of staff, and limited multidisciplinary collaboration. Facilitators were training, motivated staff, patient engagement, and project scheduling., Conclusion: The service resulted in a substantial number of medication adaptations and lifestyle recommendations, but many barriers were identified that hamper the sustained implementation of the service., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Community pharmacy is shifting its focus from traditional, product-focused roles to the provision of cognitive pharmaceutical services (CPS). Previous research has indicated that community pharmacists predominantly want to devote their capacity to CPS. Ideally, services provided also address users' needs. The general public's preferences regarding the services provided by community pharmacists are currently less understood., Aim: This study investigates the general public's preferences and perceived importance of CPS versus convenience in community pharmacy practice., Method: An online survey of 1.500 members of the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel containing questions regarding preferences for CPS and convenience was distributed. Descriptive statistics and linear regression analysis were performed to investigate the relationship between preferences and participant characteristics., Results: 516 panel members completed all questions regarding preferences and importance of the availability of services. The majority preferred convenience (68.2%) and a smaller proportion preferred CPS (27.7%). However, participants considered it important from a societal viewpoint that CPS is provided (45.0%). Participants who preferred CPS over convenience were generally older (p < 0.001) and used more medicines (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Convenience of community pharmacy services is most preferred by the general public. However, CPS is perceived as important, especially for elderly who use more medicines. Elderly patients who use more medicines more often rate CPS as more important than convenience. These findings suggest that community pharmacists should ensure that pharmacy logistics are organized efficiently before focusing on the provision of CPS., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Community pharmacists and their teams are easy accessible healthcare providers with an important role in primary care. As a consequence of the COVID-19 epidemic, (pharmaceutical) care and specifically communication between patients and healthcare providers is compromised., Objective: To describe the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on the provision of pharmaceutical care in the Netherlands., Methods: A cross-sectional study with an online questionnaire was sent to community pharmacies in the Netherlands. The questionnaire covered the following main topics: changes in pharmacy setting and logistic procedures, communication about medication and baseline characteristics., Results: Pharmacies implemented hygiene measures and minimized direct patient-provider contact, e.g. by delivering medication at home to a wider range of patients (47.0%), temporarily not conducting medication reviews (55.8%) and only performing inhalation instructions via telephone (22.3%). Only a small number of pharmacies used telepharmacy, such as video calling during patient education and counseling. A total of 76.7% of the participants expressed concerns towards the pharmaceutical care for vulnerable patients., Conclusions: Our results show considerable impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on both logistic procedures and services regarding patient education and counseling. Pharmacies should be stimulated to implement telepharmacy or remote service to optimally support patients during the COVID-19 epidemic., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Effective mobile health (mHealth) interventions have been developed to support patients with their medication use, however to date few are widely used in pharmacy practice. Normalization of an intervention is essential to have a population impact, which is defined as 'the process of getting a new intervention into routine practice'., Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the normalization potential of a complex mHealth intervention for adolescents with asthma (ADolescent Adherence Patient Tool; ADAPT) in community pharmacy practice., Methods: The Normalization Process Theory (NPT), a sociological action theory, was retrospectively applied to study the normalization potential of ADAPT. NPT explains factors that promote or hinder implementation, embedding, and integration of new interventions in clinical practice. Evaluation data (structured interviews and questionnaires) of 23 pharmacists who used the ADAPT intervention were used for this study., Results: Pharmacists understood the purpose of the ADAPT intervention and were prepared to undertake the necessary work of implementation. However changes at different levels are needed to support full normalization, such as changes in the intervention itself and changes in the pharmacist's work flow. The potential for normalization could also be enhanced by the use of product champions and appropriate reimbursement guidelines, to ensure uptake of the intervention by other pharmacists. Support from professional bodies for the use of mHealth could also promote normalization., Conclusions: Normalization of mHealth is a complex continuous process. The ADAPT intervention has the potential to be normalized in community pharmacy practice, but full normalization would require changes in both daily pharmacy practice and reimbursement models., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: There is broad consensus that community pharmacists should focus on the provision of pharmaceutical care. Studies, however, have shown that community pharmacists still spend a considerable amount of time on traditional activities such as dispensing instead of cognitive pharmaceutical services (CPS). It is not clear whether community pharmacists prefer their current time-utilization or if they are willing to spend more time on CPS., Aim: The aim of this study was to identify how community pharmacists ideally would prioritize CPS compared to other daily activities., Methods: A cross-sectional study design with Q-methodology was used to identify different viewpoints regarding task prioritization. Community pharmacists were asked to rank a total of 48 daily activities. Data was collected online using FlashQ © . Q-sorts were analyzed by principal component factor analysis and varimax rotation using PQmethod 2.35., Results: In total, 166 community pharmacists participated in this study. Three distinguishing groups were found based on task prioritization explaining 59% of the total variance among respondents. All groups ranked the provision of CPS as important, in differing degrees. Group 1 ranked CPS as most important and was also the group that contained most participants. Group 2 and 3 ranked quality assurance as most important with CPS as second. Logistics and pharmacy management were ranked low by all groups., Discussion and Conclusion: Community pharmacists rank the provision of CPS as important. So factors, probably other than task prioritization, are keeping the pharmacist from focusing on CPS in daily practice. In other studies, time constraints are mostly mentioned as major barrier. Activities such as logistics and pharmacy management are given less priority and should be delegated to supporting staff members as much as possible, to enable pharmacists to focus their available time on activities they deem important., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Hospital discharge poses a significant threat to the continuity of medication therapy and frequently results in drug-related problems post-discharge. Therefore, establishing continuity of care by realizing optimal collaboration between hospital and community pharmacists is of utmost importance., Objective: To evaluate the collaboration between hospital and community pharmacists on addressing drug-related problems after hospital discharge., Methods: A prospective follow-up study was conducted between November 2013-December 2014 in a general hospital and all affiliated community pharmacies. Adult patients, admitted for ≥48 h to the neurology or pulmonology ward were eligible if they used ≥3 chronic prescription drugs and lived in the community pharmacies' service area. The HomeCoMe intervention program was comprised of medication verification and counseling at admission, medication screening by the hospital pharmacist during admission, outpatient pharmacy discharge consultation and support, and a community pharmacist home visit within one week post-discharge., Results: The mean age of the 152 included patients was 67.0 ± 12.6 years and 56.6% were female. A total of 745 DRPs (4.9 ± 2.2 DRPs per patient, range: 0-11) were identified with the need for additional "Education or information" (36.1%) and "Compliance" (16.4%) issues as most common DRP-types. This led to a total of 928 recommendations (6.1 ± 3.0 per patient, range: 1-19) to solve the DRP. The majority of DRPs were identified (83.6%, n = 623) and solved (91.6%, n = 682) by the community pharmacist during the home visit. Furthermore, 52.5% (n = 64) of the DRPs identified during hospitalization were solved during the post-discharge home visit., Conclusions: Collaboration between hospital and community pharmacists from hospital admission to readmission to primary care is crucial to establish continuity of care. A post-discharge community pharmacist home visit is a valuable addition to in-hospital transitional care to identify and solve drug-related problems., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the context of medication use, pharmaceutical literacy skills are crucial for appropriate and safe use of medication. Recognition of patients with inadequate pharmaceutical literacy in daily pharmacy practice is difficult. No instrument is yet available to support pharmacists herein. The aim of this study was therefore to develop an interview guide for pharmacists to Recognize and Address Limited PHarmaceutical literacy (RALPH)., Methods: The RALPH interview guide was constructed in three phases: (1) development including a literature search, expert group discussion, and feasibility test with 15 patients; (2) pilot-test with 421 patients throughout 30 community pharmacies, and (3) final test with 508 patients to optimize the interview guide., Results: The development phase resulted in a first interview guide comprising 15 questions: seven in the functional domain (understanding instructions), four in the communicative domain (finding and understanding medication information) and four in the critical domain (critically analyzing medication information). This version was pilot-tested in 30 pharmacies, with 147 patients during medication reviews and another 274 patients were interviewed while waiting to collect their medication. This test phase led to removal of questions that proved difficult to interpret and to rephrasing some questions. The second version including 11 questions was tested by 109 pharmacists trainees with 508 patients, resulting in the final RALPH interview guide comprising 10 questions, all directly linked to the patient's own medication: three in the functional, three in the communicative and four in the critical domain. Besides instructions on how to use the interview guide, recommendations are provided for pharmacists on how to support patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy skills., Conclusions: The practice-based RALPH interview guide supports pharmacists in recognizing patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy. With this insight, pharmacists can tailor their medication counseling to patients' pharmaceutical literacy level to better support patients in their medication use., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy are at increased risk of drug-related problems. Recognizing these patients in daily practice is difficult. The Recognition and Addressing of Limited Pharmaceutical Literacy (RALPH) interview guide was developed as practical set of questions to recognize patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy in daily pharmacy practice., Objective: To compare agreement between pharmaceutical literacy measured with the RALPH guide and a validated general health literacy questionnaire. In addition, we provide insight into patients' pharmaceutical literacy using the RALPH interview guide., Methods: Structured face-to-face interviews with patients who visited a community pharmacy to fill a prescription for themselves were conducted. The interview included the RALPH guide as well as the Functional Communicative Critical Health Literacy (FCCHL) questionnaire to measure general health literacy. Functional, communicative and critical skills were measured and agreement between two methods was calculated., Results: Data were collected from 508 patients. Patients with limited pharmaceutical literacy, indicated by the RALPH questions, also had a lower general health literacy level according to FCCHL scores. Agreement between the RALPH guide and FCCHL questionnaire was moderate (∼60%) for the three health literacy domains. Most patients (>90%) had correct understanding of frequency and timing of medication use, but 25% did not understand warnings or precautions correctly. Finding understandable information (39%), assessing information applicability (50%) and reliability (64%) were mentioned as difficult by patients., Conclusion: Patients experienced difficulties with more complex skills, e.g. interpretation of warnings or precautions when using a medicine, finding and analyzing medication information. Whereas the FCCHL questionnaire is useful to assess general health literacy, the RALPH interview guide provides insight in the level of skills needed for good medication use and is more suitable for use in a medication specific context such as community pharmacy. Context specific assessment of skills is important to provide tailored pharmaceutical care., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Introducing a post-discharge community pharmacist home visit can secure continuity of care and prevent drug-related problems. Currently, this type of pharmaceutical care is not standard practice and implementation is challenging. Mapping the factors influencing the implementation of this new form of care is crucial to ensure successful embedding., Objective: To explore which barriers and facilitators influence community pharmacists' adoption of a post-discharge home visit., Methods: A mixed methods study was conducted with community pharmacists who had recently participated in a study that evaluated the effectiveness of a post-discharge home visit in identifying drug-related problems. Four focus groups were held guided by a topic guide based on the framework of Greenhalgh et al. After the focus groups, major barriers and facilitators were formulated into statements and presented to all participants in a scoring list to rank for relevance and feasibility in daily practice., Results: Twenty-two of the eligible 26 pharmacists participated in the focus groups. Twenty pharmacists (91%) returned the scoring list containing 21 statements. Most of these statements were perceived as both relevant and feasible by the responding pharmacists. A small number scored high on relevance but low on feasibility, making these potential important barriers to overcome for broad implementation. These were the necessity of dedicated time for performing pharmaceutical care, implementing the home visit in pharmacists' daily routine and an adequate reimbursement fee for the home visit., Conclusions: The key to successful implementation of a post-discharge home visit may lay in two facilitators which are partly interrelated: changing daily routine and reimbursement. Reimbursement will be a strong incentive, but additional efforts will be needed to reprioritize daily routines., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)