Building Bridges between Pharmacy and Psychosocial Care: Supporting and Referring Patients with Psychosocial Needs in a Pilot Study with Community Pharmacists.

Introduction: Community pharmacists are accessible primary care providers and therefore in a good position to detect unmet psychosocial needs of their patients and pharmacy visitors. Description: A collaboration between pharmacists and psychosocial work was set up in Flanders, Belgium. Community pharmacists were trained to discuss psychosocial needs, to inform patients about possible help and refer them to a Center for General Wellbeing if needed. During the pilot of the project between October 2021 and January 2022, the feasibility and potential of this collaboration were examined. Discussion: A total of 79 patient contacts about psychosocial wellbeing were reported using an online registration form, the majority of which concerned women. Family problems and mental health problems were most often reported. Focus group discussions with 28 participating pharmacists showed that they experience their role in psychosocial care as fulfilling and of valuable. Patient satisfaction was mentioned to be a major motivating factor, while time and privacy are barriers. Adequate training in psychosocial wellbeing and care was considered crucial. Conclusion: Pharmacists can be valuable partners in the recognition and referral of patients with unmet psychosocial needs. Structural collaborations between community pharmacy and psychosocial care should be further supported.

General Practitioners and Community Pharmacists' Collaboration in Primary Care: Small Steps for a Major Change.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare authorities worldwide search for ways to develop integrated care and interprofessional collaboration. In Belgium, Medical-Pharmaceutical Concertation (MPC) was introduced as a format to promote constructive dialogues between GPs and community pharmacists (CPs) with a focus on pharmacotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the implementation of MPC from the perspective of healthcare authorities and GPs/CPs. METHODS: Mixed-methods approach, including semi-structured interviews with stakeholders and service users, observations of MPC meetings and surveys in GPs/CPs. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed inductively. RESULTS: The implementation of MPC took a slow start. Parties involved had divergent views on the goals of the MPC: stakeholders focused on measurable results, while service users aimed on improving interprofessional communication. Additionally, service users felt that the lack of local structures hindered consensus building and implementation of agreements in daily practice. Support from professional associations was considered indispensable for the implementation of MPC. In order to organize this efficiently, the establishment of an independent institution, coordinating the MPC initiative, was highly recommended. CONCLUSION: The study confirms that a thorough context assessment prior to implementation of a complex project is needed and that a step-wise approach should be respected to achieve effective interprofessional relationships.

Implementation study of an intermediate medication review in Belgian community pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: The Association of Pharmacists in Belgium (APB) and local pharmacy associations launched a pilot project in collaboration with research teams from three Belgian universities to study the impact and implementation-related issues of a medication review (MR) service type 2a in Belgian community pharmacies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe the implementation process of the MR service and to present the implementation evaluation of the pilot study (testing stage). METHODS: The pilot project was a prospective observational study using mixed methods. The implementation evaluation was based on the RE-AIM model and the framework for the implementation of services in pharmacy (FISpH). Collected implementation outcomes were classified into four dimensions: reach, adoption, implementation and intent of maintenance. RESULTS: During the testing stage, 80 pharmacies participated in the study, but 25 dropped out (31%), mainly because of a reported lack of time (adoption). The 55 remaining pharmacies included 457 patients. Recruiting patients into the service was challenging for pharmacists as 48.5% of patients refused the pharmacists' proposal (reach). Internal organizational factors were major barriers for pharmacists, followed by the lack of adoption by the pharmacy team. Large pharmacies in which pharmacy owner led the project were observed to be more proactive in implementing the MR service by integrating organizational strategies to assist the implementation process (implementation). Interviewed pharmacists perceived this new service as a professionally satisfying activity. Among participating pharmacists, 92.5% found this service feasible in practice, but believed it required adapted resources to reorganize the internal pharmacy workload, additional support, such as broad-based media campaigns to increase physicians' and patients' awareness and attitudes towards the service, and modified software (maintenance). CONCLUSIONS: The medication review service was implemented in 68% of participating pilot Belgian community pharmacies but would require adapted resources and supports for larger scale implementation.