ObjectivesTo explore pharmacist and nurse views and experiences in educating patients regarding their treatment safety and tolerability as well as the roles of other professions in this regard.DesignIn this qualitative study, six focus group discussions were conducted.SettingThe National Center for Cancer Care and Research in Qatar.ParticipantsEleven pharmacists and 22 nurses providing direct patient care.ResultsConcepts related to three key themes were drawn from the seeding questions and included factors for determining the level of risk they communicated: the specific treatment regimen in question; the patient; and their assessment of the patient. Patient-related considerations arose from additional subthemes; both nurses and pharmacists described aspects related to the perceived psychological health status of the patient, as well as anticipated comprehension, as ascertained by demonstrated education and language abilities. In all discussions, it was noted that physician and family non-disclosure of cancer diagnosis to the patient profoundly influenced the nature of information they provided. While a high level of cohesion in safety communication prioritisation among these two health disciplines was found, a number of pharmacists asserted a more formal role compared to informal and repeated teaching by nurses.ConclusionsNurses and pharmacists in this Middle East healthcare environment were not reluctant to discuss treatment side effects with patients and draw on similar professional judgements in prioritising treatment risk information. We found that they did not always recognise each other's informal educational encounters and that there are opportunities to explore increased collaboration in this regard to enhance the patient care experience.

PurposeCancer treatments are frequently associated with adverse effects, but there may be a cultural reluctance by care providers to be forthcoming with patients regarding these risks for fear of promoting nonadherence. Conversely, research in a number of countries indicates high levels of patient desire for this information. We sought to explore cancer patient experiences, satisfaction, and preferences for medication risk communication in a Middle East care setting.MethodsWe developed and administered a ten-item questionnaire (Arabic and English) to a convenience sample of consenting adult patients receiving treatment at the National Center for Cancer Care and Research in Qatar.ResultsOne hundred and forty-three patients were interviewed. Most (88%) stated that the level of side effect information they received was sufficient, with physicians (86%) followed by pharmacists (39%) as the preferred sources. The majority (97%) agreed that knowing about possible side effects would help them recognize and manage the reaction, and 92% agreed that it would help them understand how to minimize or prevent the risks. Eighteen percent indicated that this information would make them not want to take treatment. Two-thirds (65%) had previously experienced intolerance to their cancer treatment regimen.ConclusionMost patients surveyed expressed preference for the details of possible side effects they may encounter in their treatment. However, one in five considered such information a factor for nonadherence, indicating the need for patient-specific approaches when communicating medication risks.

No abstract

A261 diabetes patients increased substantially in the past two decades. Future studies may consider the impact of these increases on adherence and long-term outcomes. PDB134 The imPacT of meDicare ParT D on DiaBeTes Drug use anD exPenDiTures