Impact of Medicines Helplines on patient satisfaction, patient outcomes and medicines safety for hospital patients: the development of a rating scale and an evaluation of patients’ opinions

Bramley, Diane; Innes, Alison; Dass, Niketa

doi:10.1136/ejhpharm-2017-001459

Cited by 3 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…explored clinician utilisation of advice through thematic analysis of semi‐structured interviews (Rutter et al., ). Those studies that sought patient's opinions also used pre‐defined outcome categories (Badiani et al., ; Bramley et al., ; Joseph & James, 2004; Maywald et al., ; Melnyk et al., ). For those studies utilising survey methodology, some included open ended questions allowing additional data on patient outcomes to be gained.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A large proportion of clinicians in the non-prescriber studies were pharmacists, ranging from 28% to 95% (Bertsche et al, 2007;Stubbington, Bowey, Hands & Brown, 1998). Four studies targeted the public/ patients with a further study seeking the views from both clinicians and the public (Badiani, Wills, Owen, Parker & Hall, 2017;Bramley, Innes & Dass, 2018;Joseph & James, 2004;Maywald et al, 2004;Melnyk et al, 2000).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only (Melnyk 2000, Joseph 2004, Maywald 2004, Frost Widnes 2009, Bramley 2009, Bramley 2013, Innes 2014, Rutter 2015, Strobach 2015, Bramley 2018 Hedegaard & Damkier used interviews with doctors to help inform the content of their survey questions, one of which explored impact of the answer provided (Hedegaard & Damkier, 2009), whilst Rutter et al explored clinician utilisation of advice through thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews (Rutter et al, 2015). Those studies that sought patient's opinions also used pre-defined outcome categories (Badiani et al, 2017;Bramley et al, 2018;Joseph & James, 2004;Maywald et al, 2004;Melnyk et al, 2000). For those studies utilising survey methodology, some included open ended questions allowing additional data on patient outcomes to be gained.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…reported validation of a modified version of their impact rating scale, however the level of detail reported on its validation within the paper makes it difficult to independently assess the authors’ conclusions (Bramley et al., ). The use of expert panels can provide an objective view of patient outcome, with more recent MI studies utilising this methodology, although only a small proportion of enquiries generated were included and MI pharmacists rarely included as panel members (Bramley et al., , ; Innes et al., ; Joseph & Joseph 2014). The exclusion of MI pharmacists in panels we believe is regrettable as they should be better informed to explain the rationale for MI advice given.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five studies attempted to determine the views patients had on the outcome of answers to their own enquiries they received from MI Services (Badiani et al, 2017;Bramley et al, 2018;Joseph & James, 2004;Maywald et al, 2004;Melnyk et al, 2000). The study by Melnyk et al also involved clinicians and is reported in theme 2.…”

Section: Theme 4 -Views Of Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Impact of pharmacy medicine information service advice on clinician and patient outcomes: an overview

Rutter

2019

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Pharmacy‐led medicine information (MI) services are available in many countries to support clinicians and patients make decisions on use of medicines. Objectives To establish what impact, if any, pharmacy‐led MI services have on clinician and patient outcomes. Methods All published works indexed in Embase or PubMed, meeting this review's inclusion and exclusion criteria, that wholly or partially attempted to measure the effects of MI advice were retrieved and assessed. Results Twenty studies were reviewed. Five broad themes were identified describing study findings, three were specific to clinicians: their views on the effect MI answers had; actions they took; and influence on their decision making. A fourth theme centred on patient utilisation of advice, and the fifth on ‘process measures’ attempting to determine MI worth. Discussion Studies report on positive patient outcomes as a direct result of MI advice. Clinicians and patients acted upon the advice provided. Clinicians also reported using MI advice as a ‘safety net’, to check, reassure or confirm what to do. MI advice also demonstrated economic worth, although these studies are old. Conclusion MI Service advice appears to affect clinician and patient outcomes. However, study design limitations require findings be viewed cautiously.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theme 4 -Views Of Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Impact of pharmacy medicine information service advice on clinician and patient outcomes: an overview

Rutter

2019

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A systematic review examining the effectiveness of medicines information services for patients and the general public

Williams

Jordan

Scott

et al. 2019

International Journal of Pharmacy Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP. Methods Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science, on 11 August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated. Key findings Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (17 published articles, 15 conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51%), and risk of bias was high (63%). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g. 94% and 91% of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, the advice received is reported to be usually followed (94%, and 66% for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g. problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39% of calls may concern such errors) and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48% of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients). Conclusions Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be beneficial sources of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.

show abstract

Medicine information helpline after hospitalization–a randomized trial: Impact on patient satisfaction, patient concerns about medicines and clinical outcome on patient safety

Fjære,

Vejborg,

Colberg

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aim Hospitalization often leads to changes in patients’ medicine which challenges a safe medication use after discharge. Medicine information helplines (MIHs) can be valuable for patients in overcoming these challenges. This study evaluates patient satisfaction with a newly established Danish hospital-based MIH for discharged patients. The MIH is operated by experienced pharmacists and a pharmacy technician, and the study explores how the service affects the patient’s concerns and perception of safety in relation to their medication, followed by an assessment of the clinical impact of MIH on patient safety. Method A randomized controlled study design was used in the present study. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov with the identification number NCT03829995. Participants were randomized 1:4 (50:200) into a control- and intervention group. Participants in the control group were offered standard care and those in the intervention group were offered access to the MIH. A telephone interview performed 2–4 weeks after discharge assessed patient satisfaction with the helpline and patient’s feeling of safety in relation to medicine use (primary outcome). Data were analyzed using a Mann-Whitney U test. After case handling of each enquiry to the MIH, the cases were assessed with regard to medication-related problems (MRPs) and clinical impact of the MIH service was assessed (primary outcome). Results A total of 250 participants were included in the study and 152 participated in the telephone interviews (33 control and 119 intervention). Thirty-seven questions were enquired by 26 participants to the MIH. Of these, 8 were requested before the telephone interviews and these patients all expressed a high satisfaction with the MIH (score 4.57 +/- 0.73 on a 5-point scale). Most patients offered access to the MIH expressed that it increased the sense of safety in relation to their medicines (79%). However, comparing the control- and intervention group with regard to patient concerns and feeling of safety in relation to medicine use no differences were found. Evaluation of the enquiries revealed at least one MRP per enquiry, and in most cases the advice given were assessed to have a high- or moderate clinical significance. Conclusion The MIH was appreciated by the participants, indicating that the MIH could be a valuable service for discharged patients in improving the sense of safety in relation to medication and alleviating MRPs. Providing easy access for patients to medicine information may contribute to patient safe medicine use after discharge.

show abstract

Impact of Medicines Helplines on patient satisfaction, patient outcomes and medicines safety for hospital patients: the development of a rating scale and an evaluation of patients’ opinions

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Impact of pharmacy medicine information service advice on clinician and patient outcomes: an overview

Impact of pharmacy medicine information service advice on clinician and patient outcomes: an overview

A systematic review examining the effectiveness of medicines information services for patients and the general public

Medicine information helpline after hospitalization–a randomized trial: Impact on patient satisfaction, patient concerns about medicines and clinical outcome on patient safety

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About