Search

Abstract Background Polypharmacy is common in chronic medication users, which increases the risk of drug related problems. A suitable intervention is the clinical medication review (CMR) that was introduced in the Netherlands in 2012, but the effectiveness might be hindered by limited implementation in community pharmacies. Therefore our aim was to describe the current implementation of CMRs in Dutch community pharmacies and to identify barriers to the implementation. Methods An online questionnaire was developed based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and consisted of 58 questions with open ended, multiple choice or Likert-scale answering options. It was sent out to all Dutch community pharmacies (n = 1,953) in January 2021. Descriptive statistics were used. Results A total of 289 (14.8%) community pharmacies filled out the questionnaire. Most of the pharmacists agreed that a CMR has a positive effect on the quality of pharmacotherapy (91.3%) and on medication adherence (64.3%). Pharmacists structured CMRs according to available selection criteria or guidelines (92%). Pharmacists (90%) believed that jointly conducting a CMR with a general practitioner (GP) improved their mutual relationship, whereas 21% believed it improved the relationship with a medical specialist. Lack of time was reported by 43% of pharmacists and 80% (fully) agreed conducting CMRs with a medical specialist was complicated. Most pharmacists indicated that pharmacy technicians can assist in performing CMRs, but they rarely do in practice. Conclusions Lack of time and suboptimal collaboration with medical specialists are the most important barriers to the implementation of CMRs.

Background: Polypharmacy is common in chronic medication users, which increases the risk of drug related problems. A suitable intervention is the clinical medication review (CMR) that was introduced in the Netherlands in 2012, but the effectiveness might be hindered by limited implementation in community pharmacies. Therefore our aim was to describe the current implementation of CMRs in Dutch community pharmacies and to identify barriers to the implementation. Methods: An online questionnaire was developed based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and consisted of 58 questions with open ended, multiple choice or Likert-scale answering options. It was sent out to all Dutch community pharmacies (n = 1,953) in January 2021. Descriptive statistics were used. Results: A total of 289 (14.8%) community pharmacies filled out the questionnaire. Most of the pharmacists agreed that a CMR has a positive effect on the quality of pharmacotherapy (91.3%) and on medication adherence (64.3%). Pharmacists structured CMRs according to available selection criteria or guidelines (92%). Pharmacists (90%) believed that jointly conducting a CMR with a general practitioner (GP) improved their mutual relationship, whereas 21% believed it improved the relationship with a medical specialist. Lack of time was reported by 43% of pharmacists and 80% (fully) agreed conducting CMRs with a medical specialist was complicated. Most pharmacists indicated that pharmacy technicians can assist in performing CMRs, but they rarely do in practice. Conclusions: Lack of time and suboptimal collaboration with medical specialists are the most important barriers to the implementation of CMRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background An advanced level medication review service (CMR) is systematically reimbursed and available nationwide in Slovenian primary care since 2016. CMR is performed by clinical pharmacists (CP). Close collaboration with general practitioner (GP) is required as they perform patient selection and make clinical decisions regarding patient’s medication. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted in 2018 aiming to evaluate the perspective of GPs on the implementation of pharmacist-led medication review service in Community Health Care Centre Ljubljana, Slovenia. GPs of the patients, who provided written informed consent were invited for the interviews. The semi-structured interview consisted of 5 open ended questions addressing reasons for referral of the patients, implementation of CP recommendations and the GPs’ perspective of the service in general. Interviews were audio recorded with GPs written consent, transcribed verbatim and inductive content analysis was performed in NVivo11 Pro. Results In total 38 interviews with 24 GPs were performed. The emerged themes were nested under 3 main domains representing Donabedian model of quality healthcare – structure, process, outcomes. The service structure is built on broad pharmacotherapy knowledge as the main CP competency, good accessibility, and complementarity of healthcare professions. Patients are mainly referred to the CMR due to polypharmacotherapy, however in majority there is a more in-depth reason behind (e.g., adverse events, etc.). Lack of time to recognize eligible patients and additional workload to study and implement the recommendations present the major challenges in the service process and therefore low number of referrals. CPs recommendations are mostly accepted, although the implementation time varies. When recommendation addresses medicines prescribed by a clinical specialist, the CMR report is forwarded to them for decision regarding implementation. The empowerment of the patients in medicines use was emphasized as the major benefit of the CMR, which consequently supports and enhances the quality of GP’s patient care. Transferability of recommendations to similar cases and high satisfaction with the service of GPs and patients, were mentioned. Conclusion GPs experiences with CMR are encouraging and supportive and present a base for further growth of the service.

Abstract Background Clinical medication reviews are a recognised strategy to address polypharmacy, a key part of general practice and positively associated with patient safety and clinical effectiveness. To date there has been little investigation of the patient perspective of medication reviews. Objective To explore patient experiences of medication review including the processes and activities that led up to and shaped the review. Methods Qualitative interview study within 10 general practices in Bristol. Participants were adults with polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) and ≥ 2 long-term conditions who had a record of medication review with either a GP or pharmacist. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using a data driven approach. Co-design work was undertaken with four patient and public involvement advisers to design and develop resources to support patient preparation for medication review. Results Twenty-one patients were interviewed (10 female, mean age 73 years, range 59–88 years). Medication review was viewed as an opportunity to assess the effectiveness and need for medications. Participants expected the review to focus upon medication related concerns, side-effects and symptoms. Those who were newer to review, were uncertain of the intended purpose, and described their review as a box-ticking exercise. Some participants were unfamiliar with the role of the pharmacist and expressed a lack of confidence in their clinical skills and knowledge. Face-to-face consultation and relationship continuity were considered important for efficient and effective medication review. Results informed co-production of a patient information leaflet to facilitate greater patient engagement and involvement in medication review. Conclusions A lack of understanding of the rationale for medication review can limit the value patients attach to these healthcare encounters. Improved prior communication and information around the intended purpose and potential benefits of medication review may enhance patient engagement and improve patient experience and outcomes.

Background: An advanced level medication review service (CMR) is systematically reimbursed and available nationwide in Slovenian primary care since 2016. CMR is performed by clinical pharmacists (CP). Close collaboration with general practitioner (GP) is required as they perform patient selection and make clinical decisions regarding patient's medication. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in 2018 aiming to evaluate the perspective of GPs on the implementation of pharmacist-led medication review service in Community Health Care Centre Ljubljana, Slovenia. GPs of the patients, who provided written informed consent were invited for the interviews. The semi-structured interview consisted of 5 open ended questions addressing reasons for referral of the patients, implementation of CP recommendations and the GPs' perspective of the service in general. Interviews were audio recorded with GPs written consent, transcribed verbatim and inductive content analysis was performed in NVivo11 Pro. Results: In total 38 interviews with 24 GPs were performed. The emerged themes were nested under 3 main domains representing Donabedian model of quality healthcare – structure, process, outcomes. The service structure is built on broad pharmacotherapy knowledge as the main CP competency, good accessibility, and complementarity of healthcare professions. Patients are mainly referred to the CMR due to polypharmacotherapy, however in majority there is a more in-depth reason behind (e.g., adverse events, etc.). Lack of time to recognize eligible patients and additional workload to study and implement the recommendations present the major challenges in the service process and therefore low number of referrals. CPs recommendations are mostly accepted, although the implementation time varies. When recommendation addresses medicines prescribed by a clinical specialist, the CMR report is forwarded to them for decision regarding implementation. The empowerment of the patients in medicines use was emphasized as the major benefit of the CMR, which consequently supports and enhances the quality of GP's patient care. Transferability of recommendations to similar cases and high satisfaction with the service of GPs and patients, were mentioned. Conclusion: GPs experiences with CMR are encouraging and supportive and present a base for further growth of the service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical medication reviews are a recognised strategy to address polypharmacy, a key part of general practice and positively associated with patient safety and clinical effectiveness. To date there has been little investigation of the patient perspective of medication reviews. Objective: To explore patient experiences of medication review including the processes and activities that led up to and shaped the review. Methods: Qualitative interview study within 10 general practices in Bristol. Participants were adults with polypharmacy (≥ 4 medications) and ≥ 2 long-term conditions who had a record of medication review with either a GP or pharmacist. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using a data driven approach. Co-design work was undertaken with four patient and public involvement advisers to design and develop resources to support patient preparation for medication review. Results: Twenty-one patients were interviewed (10 female, mean age 73 years, range 59–88 years). Medication review was viewed as an opportunity to assess the effectiveness and need for medications. Participants expected the review to focus upon medication related concerns, side-effects and symptoms. Those who were newer to review, were uncertain of the intended purpose, and described their review as a box-ticking exercise. Some participants were unfamiliar with the role of the pharmacist and expressed a lack of confidence in their clinical skills and knowledge. Face-to-face consultation and relationship continuity were considered important for efficient and effective medication review. Results informed co-production of a patient information leaflet to facilitate greater patient engagement and involvement in medication review. Conclusions: A lack of understanding of the rationale for medication review can limit the value patients attach to these healthcare encounters. Improved prior communication and information around the intended purpose and potential benefits of medication review may enhance patient engagement and improve patient experience and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Clinical medication reviews (CMR) are increasingly performed in older patients with polypharmacy. Studies have shown positive effects of CMR on process- and intermediate outcomes, like drug-related problems (DRPs). Little effect has been shown on clinical outcomes, like hospital admissions or health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). In particular, HR-QoL is related to the individual health-related goals and complaints of patients. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of a CMR focused on personal goals on HR-QoL and health-related complaints in older patients with polypharmacy. Methods A randomised controlled trial will be performed in 35 Dutch community pharmacies aiming to include 630 patients aged 70 years and older using seven or more chronic drugs. Patients will be randomly assigned to control or intervention group by block-randomisation per pharmacy. Patients in the intervention group receive a CMR focused on patients’ preferences, personal goals and health-related complaints. With every goal a goal attainment scale (GAS) will be proposed. Primary outcome measures are HR-QoL, measured with the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS and the number of health-related complaints per patient measured with a written questionnaire, during a follow-up period of six months. Secondary outcomes are healthcare utilisation, number and type of drug changes, number and type of health-related goals, scores on GAS and number and type of DRPs and interventions. Discussion This study is expected to add evidence on the effects of a CMR on HR-QoL and health-related complaints in older patients with polypharmacy. New in this study is the use of personal goals measured with GAS and health-related complaints as patient-related outcome measures. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register; NTR5713.

Aims: The ageing society may lead to increasing healthcare expenditure. A clinical medication review (CMR) could potentially reduce costs. The aim of this study is to perform a cost‐utility and cost‐effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective of a patient‐centred CMR. Methods: A trial‐based cost‐utility and cost‐effectiveness analysis was performed as part of the DREAMeR study, a pragmatic controlled trial that randomised patients aged ≥70 years using at least seven drugs to either CMR or usual care. Over six months, healthcare consumption and drug use were collected to estimate costs, and effects were collected in terms of quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) measured with EQ‐5D‐5 L and EQ‐VAS and as reduced health‐related complaints with impact on patients' daily lives. Results: The total mean costs per patient (n = 588) over six months were €4,189 ± 6,596 for the control group (n = 294) and €4,008 ± 6,678 for the intervention group (n = 294), including estimated intervention costs of €199 ± 67, which resulted in a mean incremental total cost savings of €181 for the intervention group compared to the control group. Compared to the control group, for the intervention group, the mean incremental QALYs over six months were: −0.00217 measured with EQ‐5D and 0.003 measured with EQ‐VAS. The incremental effect of reduced health‐related complaints with impact was −0.34. There was a likelihood of >90% that the intervention was cost‐saving. Conclusions: The benefits of a patient‐centred CMR were inconsistent with no benefits on HR‐QoL measured with EQ‐5D‐5 L and small benefits on HR‐QoL measured with EQ‐VAS and health‐related complaints with impact on patients' daily lives. Additionally, a CMR could potentially be cost saving from a societal perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The research questions of this study are 1) How do pharmacists respond to negative emotions of patients during a clinical medication review (CMR)? 2) How do patients express negative emotions during a CMR? 3) Who (pharmacist or patient) initiates a negative emotion to be discussed during a CMR?Methods: We used video-recordings to observe 132 CMR interviews of 49 pharmacists. Videos were coded with the Verona coding definitions on emotional sequences(-provider responses) (VR-CoDES(-P)).Results: In total 2538 negative emotions were identified, mainly expressed as cues (95.0 %). Often cues were expressed as verbal hints to hidden concerns (33.2 %) or were related to cognitive or physical causes (28.3 %).Three-quarters of the negative emotions were elicited by patients. 2670 pharmacists' responses were coded. The most common response was non-explicit providing space (77.6 %) and the least common response was explicit reducing space (5.8 %).Conclusion: Pharmacists are mainly non-explicitly providing space in their responses. While this hinders their ability to capture patients' problems it also may enable patients to initiate topics.Practice Implications: Pharmacists are able to respond to patients' negative emotions. Training should focus on developing pharmacist's skills to be more explicit in their responses to get more in-depth knowledge of patients' problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To analyze the impact of clinical medication reviews (CMR) on reducing unplanned hospitalizations owing to polypharmacy among older adults using an intervention. Methods: Our meta‐analysis complied with PRISMA guidelines. The literature review comprised a search for articles published between January 1972 and March 2017 on MEDLINE and Google Scholar. We identified randomized controlled trials focusing on CMR that evaluated unplanned hospitalization and re‐hospitalization among older adults as a primary outcome. The keywords used were "CMR" or "medication review" in their titles, and the phrases "elderly" or "older adults" or "geriatric" and "polypharmacy." The randomized controlled trials selected were divided according to the three types of CMR to analyze the characteristics of each review. Results: We included nine randomized controlled trials that examined the impact of CMR of polypharmacy in older patients. Five trials corresponded to CMR type I (prescription only review) or II (adherence review), whereas four corresponded to type III (comprehensive clinical evaluation for disease management). Type I/II increased the number of unplanned hospitalizations (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07–1.38, P = 0.002), whereas type III decreased hospital admissions (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79–0.95, P = 0.001). Conclusions: The present findings show the need for an intervention standardization for CMR, particularly for type III in older adults with polypharmacy, to decrease hospitalizations. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2019; 19: 1275–1281. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies have shown that a clinical medication review (CMR) reduces drug-related problems (DRPs), but the effects on clinical outcomes are less clear. Perhaps, CMRs in older persons could me more effective when they focus on patients' personal goals and health-related complaints.Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether goal attainment scaling (GAS) is a useful tool for determining goals and monitoring their attainment during CMR.Methods: This study was an analysis based on data of the intervention group of the DREAMeR-study; a randomised controlled trial investigating the effects of CMR in primary care. 315 persons aged ≥70 years using ≥7 drugs were randomised to the intervention: a CMR focused on personal goals using GAS. Outcome measures were: percentage of persons with health-related goals, attainment of goals measured with GAS-scores after three and six months, type of health-related goals and implementation rates of recommendations for GAS-related DRPs and other DRPs.Results: A total of 406 health-related goals were set for 283 of 315 included persons (90%). Of the 350 evaluated goals (86%), 37% was attained after three months and 43% after six months. The goals 'reduce pain' (n = 66, 16%), 'improve mobility' (n = 57, 14%) and 'reduce number of pills' (n = 37, 9.1%) were most prevalent. The implementation rate of recommendations for GAS-related DRPs was 81% compared to 62% for not GAS-related DRPs (p < 0.05).Conclusion: Goal setting is important for prioritizing the most important problems during clinical medication review and Goal Attainment Scaling seems to be a useful tool for monitoring the attainment of these goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical medication reviews (CMR) are increasingly performed in older patients with polypharmacy. Studies have shown positive effects of CMR on process- and intermediate outcomes, like drug-related problems (DRPs). Little effect has been shown on clinical outcomes, like hospital admissions or health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). In particular, HR-QoL is related to the individual health-related goals and complaints of patients. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of a CMR focused on personal goals on HR-QoL and health-related complaints in older patients with polypharmacy.Methods: A randomised controlled trial will be performed in 35 Dutch community pharmacies aiming to include 630 patients aged 70 years and older using seven or more chronic drugs. Patients will be randomly assigned to control or intervention group by block-randomisation per pharmacy. Patients in the intervention group receive a CMR focused on patients' preferences, personal goals and health-related complaints. With every goal a goal attainment scale (GAS) will be proposed. Primary outcome measures are HR-QoL, measured with the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS and the number of health-related complaints per patient measured with a written questionnaire, during a follow-up period of six months. Secondary outcomes are healthcare utilisation, number and type of drug changes, number and type of health-related goals, scores on GAS and number and type of DRPs and interventions.Discussion: This study is expected to add evidence on the effects of a CMR on HR-QoL and health-related complaints in older patients with polypharmacy. New in this study is the use of personal goals measured with GAS and health-related complaints as patient-related outcome measures.Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register; NTR5713 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Objectives Targeting older patients with predictive factors for drug-related problems (DRPs) could make clinical medication reviews more cost-effective. The aim of this study was to identify the number, type, and potential predictive factors for DRPs in older polypharmacy patients. Methods Community pharmacists performed clinical medication reviews and documented DRPs, types of interventions, and their implementation in older patients. Results Three hundred eighty-eight medication reviews were analyzed, 964 DRPs (average 2.5 ± 1.9), and 1022 interventions (average 2.6 ± 2.0) were identified. The overall implementation rate of interventions was 70.1%, the highest was observed in interventions aiming to resolve the lack of therapy monitoring (86.8%). Patients with ≥12 medications had an increased risk of ≥5 DRPs ( P < .001). Asthma was associated with lack of adherence ( P = .002), lack of aspirin, statins, and proton pump inhibitors use with additional therapy needed ( P = .002-.004). Predictive factors for drug interactions were antihypertensive medications and/or medications with narrow therapeutic index ( P < .05). Lack of efficacy was associated with diabetes ( P = .006). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were risk factors for inappropriate drug selection ( P = .002). Lack of monitoring was associated with hypertension ( P = .013), whereas benzodiazepines ( P < .001) and aspirin ( P = .021) were overused. Conclusion Patients with asthma, hypertension, and diabetes and lack of statin, antithrombotic agent, and/or proton pump inhibitor use were associated with higher risks for DRPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Medication-related hospital admissions in Australia have previously been estimated to account for approximately 3% of all hospital admissions, with hospital entry points being a point of vulnerability. The timely medication review and reconciliation by a pharmacist at the early stage of an admission for patients admitted to the Acute Medical Unit (AMU) would be beneficial. Setting The Emergency Department (ED) and AMU in a 300 bed tertiary teaching hospital, in South Australia. Objective To investigate the impact of a Medical Admissions (MA) pharmacist on the proportion of AMU patients who receive a complete and accurate medication history by a pharmacist prior to admission and within 4 h of presentation. Method This prospective observational study with a non-concurrent parallel study design examined a standard clinical pharmacist service within the AMU and ED to a Medical Admissions (MA) Pharmacist, in addition to the standard AMU and ED pharmacist service. Continuous variables were analysed using a two sample t test, whilst categorical data were analysed using Fisher's exact test. Risk ratios were also calculated for categorical data, with p < 0.05 taken as statistically significant. Main outcome measures Rates of completion of a complete medication history prior to admission and proportion of patients seen within 4 h of presentation by a pharmacist. Results The intervention resulted in more patients receiving a complete medication history prior to admission (2.7% in the control group vs 18.5%, p < 0.01) and being seen by the pharmacist within 4 h of presentation (1.6% in the control group vs 7.5%, p < 0.01). Conclusion Implementation of an extended hours clinical pharmacy service in the form of a medical admissions pharmacist based in the ED significantly increased the number of complete medication histories and clinical reviews completed for patients being admitted to an AMU. These were also completed earlier in the patients' admission. There was also a small trend toward increasing the proportion of patients discharged by 11 am in the intervention group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information on medication use and drug-related problems is important in the preparation of clinical medication reviews. Critical information can only be provided by patients themselves, but interviewing patients is time-consuming. Alternatively, patient information could be obtained with a questionnaire.Objective: In this study the agreement between patient information on medication use and drug-related problems in older patients obtained with a questionnaire was compared with information obtained during an interview.Setting: General practice in The Netherlands.Method: A questionnaire was developed to obtain information on actual medication use and drug-related problems. Two patient groups ≥65 years were selected based on general practitioner electronic medical records in nine practices; I. polypharmacy and II. ≥1 predefined general geriatric problems. Eligible patients were asked to complete the questionnaire and were interviewed afterwards.Main Outcome Measure: Agreement on information on medication use and drug-related problems collected with the questionnaire and interview was calculated.Results: Ninety-seven patients participated. Of all medications used, 87.6 % (95 % CI 84.7-90.5) was reported identically in the questionnaire and interview. Agreement for the complete medication list was found for 45.4 % (95 % CI 35.8-55.3) of the patients. On drug-related problem level, agreement between questionnaire and interview was 75 %. Agreement tended to be lower in vulnerable patients characterized by ≥4 chronic diseases, ≥10 medications used and low health literacy.Conclusion: Information from a questionnaire showed reasonable agreement compared with interviewing. The patients reported more medications and drug-related problems in the interview than the questionnaire. Taking the limitations into account, a questionnaire seems a suitable tool for medication reviews that may replace an interview for most patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Inappropriate drug use has been identified as one of the most important problems affecting the quality of care in older people. Inappropriate drug use may increase the risk of the occurrence of 'geriatric giants' such as immobility, instability, incontinence and cognitive impairment. There are indications that clinical medication reviews (CMR) can reduce inappropriate drug use. However, CMRs have not yet been implemented at a large scale in primary care. An innovative medication review program in primary care will be developed which tackles the most important obstacles for a large scale implementation of CMRs. The aim of this study is to assess whether this CMR program is (cost-) effective compared with usual general practice care for older patients with geriatric symptoms with regard to quality of life and geriatric symptoms. Methods A cluster randomised controlled trial will be performed in 20 Dutch general practices including 500 patients. Patients of 65 years and older are eligible if they newly present with pre-specified geriatric symptoms in general practice and chronic use of at least one prescribed drug. GP practices will be stratified by practice size and randomly allocated to control (n = 10) or intervention group (n = 10). The intervention consists of CMRs which will be facilitated and prepared by an expert team consisting of a GP and a pharmacist. Primary outcome measures are patient's quality of life and the presence of self-reported geriatric symptoms during a follow-up period of 6 months. Secondary outcomes are costs of healthcare utilisation, feasibility, number of drug related problems, medication adherence and satisfaction with medication. Discussion This study is expected to add evidence on the (cost-) effectiveness of an optimally facilitated, prepared and structured CMR in comparison with usual care in older patients who present a geriatric symptom to their GP. The strength of this study is that it will be conducted in daily clinical practice. This improves the possibilities to implement the CMRs in the primary care setting on a large scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Medication review procedures have been developed in many countries to improve rational and safe medication use. The similarities, comprehensiveness, and effectiveness of these procedures has not been assessed, or compared. Objective The aim of this study was to explore medication review practices in European countries. Methods An online survey was sent to 32 European countries (all 28 European Union countries and 4 other European countries) by email to one person in each country known to be aware of medication review practices in their country in May 2011. The informants were identified through Pharmaceutical Group of European Union. To complement and validate the information received through Pharmaceutical Group of European Union, medication review experts involved in Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe were contacted. The survey assessed comprehensiveness of the medication review procedures classified according to 3 types in terms of settings; access to patient clinical information; patient involvement; availability of documentation and information; collaboration with the physician; quality control, and training required. Results Almost two thirds (64%) of the 25 European countries which responded (response rate 78%) indicated having at least one type of medication review procedure in their country. In the community setting prescription (type I) and adherence (type II) medication reviews were the most common (established in 9 and 11 countries, respectively). More comprehensive type III clinical medication reviews requiring access to clinical patient information were still rare, and just being established in 6 countries. Conclusions Medication review procedures are becoming common in health care throughout Europe, however improving their comprehensiveness would require better access to patient information for those professionals conducting clinical medication reviews. In addition to benchmarking, the inventory can enhance cooperation between countries and stakeholders involved in medication review practice development nationally and internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research on the benefits of clinical medication reviews (CMRs) performed by pharmacists has been conducted mostly in controlled settings and has been widely published. Less is known of the effects after large scale implementation in community pharmacies. An online CMR tool enabled the systematic registration of drug-related problems (DRPs) and implemented interventions derived from CMRs in daily practice. Objective: To describe the effects of CMRs on pharmacy practice after large-scale implementation in the Netherlands. Setting: 268 community pharmacies. Pharmacists were trained on CMRs with a patient centred approach. Method: Retrospective analyses of DRPs, pharmacists' proposals and implemented interventions recorded between January 1st and September 1st 2012. Main outcome measure: Frequencies of DRPs, intervention proposals, implemented interventions, and drugs involved. Results: 4,579 CMRs were analysed. On average 2.9 (SD 2.1) DRPs per review were identified. 4,123 (31 %) of the DRPs led to medication changes. Stopping a drug (16 %) was more frequent than starting a drug (8.1 %). Drugs related to cardiovascular risk management, diabetes and osteoporosis were most frequently involved. Conclusion: This study is the largest analysis of pharmacists-initiated CMRs in the Netherlands to date. The findings demonstrate the potential to reduce medication-related errors through pharmacist involvements in complex pharmacotherapy and the positive impact on the quality of drug therapy through making necessary medication changes. The data also support the need for large-scale implementation of pharmacists-initiated CMRs in the presence of proper training programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People receiving long-term antidepressant drug therapy can find it continues for years without review, which may not be the best treatment for their condition. A pilot nurse-led medication review clinic for such clients was found to provide a cost-effective assessment and, if necessary, an appropriate adjustment of their regimen. INSET: Case study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: to measure the impact of pharmacist-conducted clinical medication review with elderly care home residents. Design: randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist against usual care. Setting: sixty-five care homes for the elderly in Leeds, UK. Participants: a total of 661 residents aged 65+ years on one or more medicines. Intervention: clinical medication review by a pharmacist with patient and clinical records. Recommendations to general practitioner for approval and implementation. Control patients received usual general practitioner care. Main outcome measures: primary: number of changes in medication per participant. Secondary: number and cost of repeat medicines per participant; medication review rate; mortality, falls, hospital admissions, general practitioner consultations, Barthel index, Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (SMMSE). Results: the pharmacist reviewed 315/331 (95.2%) patients in 6 months. A total of 62/330 (18.8%) control patients were reviewed by their general practitioner. The mean number of drug changes per patient were 3.1 for intervention and 2.4 for control group (P < 0.0001). There were respectively 0.8 and 1.3 falls per patient (P < 0.0001. There was no significant difference for GP consultations per patient (means 2.9 and 2.8 in 6 months, P = 0.5), hospitalisations (means 0.2 and 0.3,P = 0.11), deaths (51/331 and 48/330,P = 0.81), Barthel score (9.8 and 9.3, P = 0.06), SMMSE score (13.9 and 13.8, P = 0.62), number and cost of drugs per patient (6.7 and 6.9, P = 0.5) (£42.24 and £42.94 per 28 days). A total of 75.6% (565/747) of pharmacist recommendations were accepted by the genera] practitioner; and 76.6% (433/565) of accepted recommendations were implemented. Conclusions: general practitioners do not review most care home patients' medication. A clinical pharmacist can review them and make recommendations that are usually accepted. This leads to substantial change in patients' medication regimens without change in drug costs. There is a reduction in the number of falls. There is no significant change in consultations, hospitalisation, mortality,, SMMSE or Barthel scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Using clinical medication reviews, analyze the most pharmaceuticals intervention generating treatments and the problems associated., Methods: Analysis of activity reports made by 6th year pharmaceutical students from the University of Bordeaux, class of 2017-2018., Results: 76 % of clinical medication review have detected at least one drug related problem in the population of this study. Drug classes that most frequently lead to pharmaceutical interventions are nervous system drugs, alimentary tract and metabolisma drugs and cardiovascular system drugs. The most frequent drug related problems are an unjustified prescription, a contraindication or a non-compliance with the standards of care and posology issues., Conclusions: The most at risk and pharmaceutical intervention generating drugs in this study are the same as described in the international literature. This shows that more precautions must be taken for their use in the elderly. Furthermore, this new pharmaceutical service is an efficient way to detect them., (Copyright © 2021 Académie Nationale de Pharmacie. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

For delivering high quality pharmaceutical care pharmacy students need to develop the competences for patient centered communication. The aim of the article is to describe how a curriculum on patient centered communication can be designed for a pharmacy program. General educational principles for curriculum design are based on the theories of constructive alignment, self-directed learning and the self-determination theory. Other principles are paying systematic and explicit attention to skills development, learning skills in the context of the pharmacy practice and using a well-balanced system for the assessment of students' performance. Effective educational methods for teaching communication skills are small group training sessions preferably with (simulation) patients, preceded by lectures or e-learning modules. For (formative or summative) assessment different methods can be used. The Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) is preferred for summative assessment of communication competence. The principles and educational methods are illustrated with examples from the curriculum of the master Pharmacy program of Utrecht University (The Netherlands). The topics 'pharmaceutical consultations on prescription medicine,' 'pharmaceutical consultations on self-care medication' and 'clinical medication reviews' are described in detail. Finally, lessons learned are shared.