Objective To describe communication between pharmacy staff and patients at the counter in outpatient pharmacies. Both content and communication style were investigated. Methods Pharmaceutical encounters in three outpatient pharmacies in the Netherlands were video-recorded. Videos were analyzed based on an observation protocol for the following information: content of encounter, initiator of a theme and pharmacy staff's communication style. Results In total, 119 encounters were recorded which concerned 42 first prescriptions, 16 first refill prescriptions and 61 follow-up refill prescriptions. During all encounters, discussion was mostly initiated by pharmacy staff (85%). In first prescription encounters topics most frequently discussed included instructions for use (83%) and dosage instructions (95%). In first refill encounters, patient experiences such as adverse effects (44%) and beneficial effects (38%) were regularly discussed in contrast to follow-up refills (7% and 5%). Patients’ opinion on medication was hardly discussed. Conclusion Pharmacy staff in outpatient pharmacies generally provide practical information, less frequently they discuss patients’ experiences and seldom discuss patients’ perceptions and preferences about prescribed medication. Practice implications This study shows there is room for improvement, as communication is still not according to professional guidelines. To implement professional guidelines successfully, it is necessary to identify underlying reasons for not following the guidelines.
LINK
As the population ages, more people will have comorbid disorders and polypharmacy. Medication should be reviewed regularly in order to avoid adverse drug reactions and medication-related hospital visits, but this is often not done. As part of our student-run clinic project, we investigated whether an interprofessional student-run medication review program (ISP) added to standard care at a geriatric outpatient clinic leads to better prescribing. In this controlled clinical trial, patients visiting a memory outpatient clinic were allocated to standard care (control group) or standard care plus the ISP team (intervention group). The medications of all patients were reviewed by a review panel (“gold standard”), resident, and in the intervention arm also by an ISP team consisting of a group of students from the medicine and pharmacy faculties and students from the higher education school of nursing for advanced nursing practice. For both groups, the number of STOPP/START-based medication changes mentioned in general practitioner (GP) correspondence and the implementation of these changes about 6 weeks after the outpatient visit were investigated. The data of 216 patients were analyzed (control group = 100, intervention group = 116). More recommendations for STOPP/STARTbased medication changes were made in the GP correspondence in the intervention group than in the control group (43% vs. 24%, P = < 0.001). After 6 weeks, a significantly higher proportion of these changes were implemented in the intervention group (19% vs. 9%, P = 0.001). The ISP team, in addition to standard care, is an effective intervention for optimizing pharmacotherapy and medication safety in a geriatric outpatient clinic.
MULTIFILE
ABSTRACT Background: We investigated if the addition of an inter-professional student-led medication review team (ISP-team) to standard care can increase the number of detected ADRs and reduce the number of ADRs 3 months after an outpatient visit. Research design and methods: In this controlled clinical trial, patients were allocated to standard care (control group) or standard care plus the ISP team (intervention group). The ISP team consisted of medical and pharmacy students and student nurse practitioners. The team performed a structured medication review and adjusted medication to reduce the number of ADRs. Three months after the outpatient visit, a clinical pharmacologist who was blinded for allocation performed a follow-up telephone interview to determine whether patients experienced ADRs. Results: During the outpatient clinic visit, significantly more (p < 0.001) ADRs were detected in the intervention group (n = 48) than in the control group (n = 10). In both groups, 60–63% of all detected ADRs were managed. Three months after the outpatient visit, significantly fewer (predominantly mild and moderately severe) ADRs related to benzodiazepine derivatives and antihypertensive causing dizziness were detected in the patients of the intervention group. Conclusions: An ISP team in addition to standard care increases the detection and management of ADRs in elderly patients resulting in fewer mild and moderately severe ADRs
MULTIFILE
