Background: Medication errors are a leading cause of mortality and morbidity. Clinical pharmacy services provided in hospital can reduce medication errors and medication related harm. However, few rural or remote hospitals in Australia have a clinical pharmacy service. This study will evaluate a virtual clinical pharmacy service (VCPS) provided via telehealth to eight rural and remote hospitals in NSW, Australia. Methods: A stepped wedge cluster randomised trial design will use routinely collected data from patients' electronic medical records (n = 2080) to evaluate the VCPS at eight facilities. The sequence of steps is randomised, allowing for control of potential confounding temporal trends. Primary outcomes are number of medication reconciliations completed on admission and discharge. Secondary outcomes are length of stay, falls and 28 day readmissions. A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) will be conducted. The CEA will answer the question of whether the VCPS is more cost-effective compared to treatment as usual; the CBA will consider the rate of return on investing in the VCPS. A patient experience measure (n = 500) and medication adherence questionnaire (n = 100 pre and post) will also be used to identify patient responses to the virtual service. Focus groups will investigate implementation from hospital staff perspectives at each site. Analyses of routine data will comprise generalised linear mixed models. Descriptive statistical analysis will summarise patient experience responses. Differences in medication adherence will be compared using linear regression models. Thematic analysis of focus groups will identify barriers and facilitators to VCPS implementation. Discussion: We aim to demonstrate the effectiveness of virtual pharmacy interventions for rural populations, and inform best practice for using virtual healthcare to improve access to pharmacy services. It is widely recognised that clinical pharmacists are best placed to reduce medication errors. However, pharmacy services are limited in rural and remote hospitals. This project will provide evidence about ways in which the benefits of hospital pharmacists can be maximised utilising telehealth technology. If successful, this project can provide a model for pharmacy delivery in rural and remote locations.
Introduction This study investigated differences between rural Australian First Nations and non-First Nations survey respondents’ perceptions of COVID-19-related risks and analysed other variables that could predict an exacerbation of anxiety related to COVID-19 harms. Methods A cross-sectional online and paper survey of rural residents from the western regions of NSW, Australia, was conducted. Descriptive and multivariate statistical analyses were used to assess links between First Nations status and demographic measures including postcode, age, gender, education, rural or town/village location, proximity to medical services and living situation. The analysis included five items related to perceptions about COVID-19: perceived likelihood of contracting COVID-19 in the next 12 months, perceived harmfulness of the virus, how often people felt afraid, perception about respondents’ ability to do something about the virus and perceived economic impacts of the pandemic. Results There were significant differences between First Nations (n=60) and non-First Nations (n= 639) respondents across all sociodemographic categories. The results reflect a significantly higher level of anxiety among the First Nations Australians in the sample: they felt afraid more often, felt it was highly likely they would catch the virus and if they did catch the virus perceived that it would be very harmful. Living with children under eighteen years of age and in small rural towns were key factors linked to feeling afraid of COVID-19 and First Nations status. Conclusion Health risk communication in pandemic response should include an equitable focus on rural areas, recognising that First Nations Australians are a significant proportion of the rural population with different risk factors and concerns than those of non-First Nations Australians. This principle of First Nations-led design is critical to all health policy and planning. The Australian Government should include rural areas in planning pandemic responses, recognising that First Nations populations are a significant proportion of the rural population creating syndemic conditions.
This study investigated differences between rural Australian First Nations and non-First Nations survey respondents’ perceptions of COVID-19 related risks; and analysed other variables that could predict an exacerbation of anxiety related to COVID-19 harms. Methods A cross-sectional online and paper survey of rural and regional residents from the western regions of NSW, Australia was conducted. Descriptive and multivariate statistical analyses were used to assess links between First Nations status and other variables. Results There were significant differences between First Nations (n=60) and non-First Nations (n= 639) respondents across all socio-demographic categories. The results reflect a significantly higher level of anxiety among the First Nations Australians in the sample: they felt afraid more often, felt it was highly likely they would catch the virus and if they did catch the virus perceived that it would be very harmful. Living with children under eighteen years of age and in small rural towns were key factors linked to feeling afraid of COVID-19 and First Nations status. Conclusion Health risk communication in pandemic response should include an equitable focus on rural areas, recognising that First Nations Australians are a significant proportion of the rural population with different risk factors and concerns than those of non-First Nations Australians. This principle of First Nations led design is critical to all health policy and planning. Governments globally should include rural areas in planning pandemic responses, recognising that First Nations populations are a significant proportion of the rural population creating syndemic conditions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.