Eligibility requirements for community pharmacy medication review services in Canada

Pammett, Robert; Jorgenson, Derek

doi:10.1177/1715163513514006

Cited by 21 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, these activities require minimal resources for their accomplishment: conditions that ensure privacy in the pharmacist/patient therapeutic relationship, criteria for the provision of the service, documentation and training, among others 6 , 11 , 15 , 21 , 24 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In several countries, an important aspect of the activities of clinical nature concerns the organization of services with this purpose and the character of exclusive dedication by the person who performs these activities. Pharmacists who engage in these services are not authorized by the health systems or class authorities to carry out other activities, to prevent conflicts of interest, as well as to optimize the work they perform 11 , 21 , 24 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dispensing requires pharmacists to report, guide, and educate on the use of medicines. Such activity, particular to this professional – essential to the proper use of this technology – does not necessarily imply that the pharmacist who practices dispensing should take responsibility for the results of the patient’s drug therapy, which is required from those who perform the pharmaceutical care 2 , 6 , 12 , 15 , 17 , 21 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In several countries 5 , 7 , 9 , 21 , 23 , 27 , pharmaceutical care a has been assumed as strategic policy for reducing the impact of drug-related morbidity and mortality 6 , 12 , 17 . In Brazil, it is part of the Política Nacional de Assistência Farmacêutica (PNAF – National Policy of Pharmaceutical Services).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Pharmaceutical care in Brazil’s primary health care

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE To characterize the activities of clinical nature developed by pharmacists in basic health units and their participation in educational activities aiming at health promotion.METHODS This article is part of the Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional de Medicamentos – Serviços, 2015 (PNAUM – National Survey on Access, Use and Promotion of Rational Use of Medicines – Services, 2015), a cross-sectional and exploratory study, of evaluative nature, consisting of a survey of information in a representative sample of cities, stratified by the Brazilian regions that constitute domains of study, and a subsample of primary health care services. The interviewed pharmacists (n=285) were responsible for the delivery of medicines and were interviewed in person with the use of a script. The characterization of the activities of clinical nature was based on information from pharmacists who declared to perform them, and on participation in educational activities aiming at health promotion, according to information from all pharmacists. The results are presented in frequency and their 95% confidence intervals.RESULTS From the interviewed subjects, 21.3% said they perform activities of clinical nature. Of these, more than 80% considered them very important; the majority does not dispose of specific places to perform them, which hinders privacy and confidentiality in these activities. The main denominations were “pharmaceutical guidance” and “pharmaceutical care.” The registration of activities is mainly made in the users’ medical records, computerized system, and in a specific document filed at the pharmacy, impairing the circulation of information among professionals. Most pharmacists performed these activities mainly along with physicians and nurses; 24.7% rarely participated in meetings with the health team, and 19.7% have never participated.CONCLUSIONS Activities of clinical nature performed by pharmacists in Brazil are still incipient. The difficulties found point out to the professionals’ improvisation and effort. The small participation in educational activities of health promotion indicates little integration of pharmacists with the health team and of pharmaceutical services with other health actions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Pharmaceutical care in Brazil’s primary health care

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With respect to the pharmaceutical care process [ 12 , 23 ], the medication review is the starting point leading to the suggestion of solutions, the planning and implementation of interventions and ultimately to the evaluation of the outcomes [ 24 ]. Pharmacist-led medication review services are available in several countries such as the United Kingdom (Medicines Use Review, MUR) [ 25 ], United States of America (Medication Therapy Management, MTM) [ 26 , 27 ], Australia (Home Medication Review, HMR) [ 28 ], Canada (MedsCheck) [ 29 , 30 ], and New Zealand (Medicines Use Review, MUR) [ 31 ]. According to a recent meta-analysis, a majority (57.9 %) of fee-for-service pharmacist-led medication reviews improved medication adherence and positively influenced patient outcomes [ 24 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of a community pharmacist-led medication review on medicines use in patients on polypharmacy - a prospective randomised controlled trial

Messerli

Blozik

Vriends

et al. 2016

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIn 2010 the ‘Polymedication Check’ (PMC), a pharmacist-led medication review, was newly introduced to be delivered independently from the prescriber and reimbursed by the Swiss health insurances. This study aimed at evaluating the impact of this new cognitive service focusing on medicines use and patients’ adherence in everyday life.MethodsThis randomised controlled trial was conducted in 54 Swiss community pharmacies. Eligible patients used ≥4 prescribed medicines over >3 months. The intervention group received a PMC at study start (T-0) and after 28 weeks (T-28) while the control group received only a PMC at T-28.Primary outcome measure was change in patients’ objective adherence, calculated as Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) and Daily Polypharmacy Possession Ratio (DPPR), using refill data from the pharmacies and patient information of dosing.Subjective adherence was assessed as secondary outcome by self-report questionnaires (at T-0 and T-28) and telephone interviews (at T-2 and T-16), where participants estimated their overall adherence on a scale from 0–100 %.Results and discussionA total of 450 patients were randomly allocated to intervention (N = 218, 48.4 %) and control group (N = 232, 51.6 %). Dropout rate was fairly low and comparable for both groups (NInt = 37 (17.0 %), NCont = 41 (17.7 %), p = 0.845). Main addressed drug-related problem (DRP) during PMC at T-0 was insufficient adherence to at least one medicine (N = 69, 26.7 %). At T-28, 1020 chronic therapies fulfilled inclusion criteria for MPR calculation, representing 293 of 372 patients (78.8 %). Mean MPR and adherence to polypharmacy (DPPR) for both groups were equally high (MPRInt = 88.3, SD = 19.03; MPRCont = 87.5, SD = 20.75 (p = 0.811) and DPPRInt = 88.0, SD = 13.31; DPPRCont = 87.5, SD = 20.75 (p = 0.906), respectively).Mean absolute change of subjective adherence between T-0 and T-2 was +1.03 % in the intervention and −0.41 % in the control group (p = 0.058). The number of patients reporting a change of their adherence of more than ±5 points on a scale 0–100 % between T-0 and T-2 was significantly higher in the intervention group (NImprovement = 30; NWorsening = 14) than in the control group (NImprovement = 20; NWorsening = 24; p = 0.028).ConclusionThrough the PMC pharmacist were able to identify a significant number of DRPs. Participants showed high baseline objective adherence of 87.5 %, providing little potential for improvement. Hence, no significant increase of objective adherence was observed. However, regarding changes in subjective adherence of more than ±5 % the PMC showed a positive effect.Trial registrationClinical trial registry database, NCT01739816; first entry on November 27, 2012.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1384-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Sustaining practice change in health care: the impact of a national quality improvement program on the uptake of collaborative medicines reviews

Ellett

Pratt

Sluggett

et al. 2018

Pharmacy Practice and Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Eligibility requirements for community pharmacy medication review services in Canada

Abstract: POLICY BrIef Peer-reviewed 2 0 C P J / R P C • J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 4 • V O L 1 4 7 , N O 1

Cited by 21 publications

References 4 publications

Pharmaceutical care in Brazil’s primary health care

Pharmaceutical care in Brazil’s primary health care

Impact of a community pharmacist-led medication review on medicines use in patients on polypharmacy - a prospective randomised controlled trial

Sustaining practice change in health care: the impact of a national quality improvement program on the uptake of collaborative medicines reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About