Search

Trials of hospital deprescribing interventions have demonstrated limited changes in practitioner behaviour. Our previous research characterised four barriers and one enabler to geriatricians and pharmacists deprescribing in hospital that require addressing by a behaviour change intervention. Six behaviour change techniques (BCTs) have also been selected by the target audience using the hospital Deprescribing Implementation Framework (hDIF). This research aimed to co-design and operationalise the content, mode of delivery and duration/intensity of the six selected BCTs to develop the CompreHensive geriAtRician-led MEdication Review (CHARMER) deprescribing intervention. We established co-design panels at three hospitals representing contextual factors likely to influence CHARMER implementation. Panels comprised geriatricians, pharmacists and other hospital staff likely to be involved in implementation. We convened two rounds of co-design workshops with each hospital to design a prototype for each BCT, which went for feedback at a final workshop attended by all three hospital panels. The six BCTs were co-designed into an intervention comprising:(1&2) Pharmacists' workshop with pros and cons of deprescribing activities, and videos of salient patient cases3 Regular geriatrician and pharmacist deprescribing briefings4 Videos of geriatricians navigating challenging deprescribing consultations5 Hospital deprescribing action plan6 Dashboard to benchmark deprescribing activitiesAutomated prompts to flag high-risk patients for deprescribing and a primary and secondary care deprescribing forum were proposed as additional BCTs by stakeholders. These were later excluded as they were not fidelitous to the theoretical determinants of geriatricians' and pharmacists' deprescribing behaviours. This study illustrates the integration of theory and co-design methodology with the target audience and staff likely to be involved in implementation of a hospital deprescribing behaviour change intervention. The development of an intervention that remains faithful to the underpinning mechanisms of action of behaviour change is a strength of this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Chronic pain is predominantly managed in primary care, although often ineffectively. There is growing evidence to support the potential role of nurses and pharmacists in the effective management of chronic pain. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of a pain clinic jointly managed by a nurse and pharmacist. Design A mixed-methods design consisting of qualitative interviews embedded within a quasi-experimental study. Settings A community-based nurse-pharmacist led pain clinic in the north of England. Participants Adult chronic pain (non-malignant) patients referred to the pain clinic. Methods Pain intensity was the primary outcome. Questionnaires (the Brief Pain Inventory, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the SF-36 and the Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire) were administered at the baseline, on discharge and at 3-month post-discharge (Brief Pain Inventory and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale only). Patient satisfaction was explored using face-to-face, semi-structured qualitative interviews. Results Seventy-nine patients with a mean age of 46.5 years (SD ± 14.4) took part in the quasi-experimental study. Thirty-six and nine patients completed the discharge and 3-month follow-up questionnaires respectively. Compared to baseline, statistically significant reductions were noted for two of the outcome measures: pain intensity ( P = 0.02), and interference of pain with physical functioning ( P = 0.02) on discharge from the service. Nineteen patients participated in qualitative interviews. The patients were, in general, satisfied with the quality of service. Four contributing factors to patient satisfaction were identified: ample consultation time, in-depth specialised knowledge, listening and understanding to patients’ needs, and a holistic approach. Conclusions Nurse and pharmacist managed community-based pain clinics can effectively deliver quality pain management services as they offer an interdisciplinary holistic approach to pain management. Such services have the potential not only to reduce the burden on secondary care but also decrease long waiting times for referral to secondary care. Further research is required to support the development of evidence based referral guidelines to such services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]