Pharmacists' current and potential prescribing roles in primary care in the Netherlands: a case study.

In some countries, pharmacists have obtained prescribing rights to improve quality and accessibility of care and reduce physician workload. This case study explored pharmacists' current roles in and potential for prescribing in primary care in the Netherlands, where prescribing rights for pharmacists do not exist. Participatory observations of pharmacists working in either general practice or community pharmacy were conducted, as were semi-structured interviews about current and potential practice. The latter were extended to patients and other healthcare professionals, mainly general practitioners, resulting in 34 interviews in total. Thematic analyses revealed that pharmacists, in all cases, wrote prescriptions that were then authorized by a physician before dispensing. General practice-based pharmacists often prescribed medications during patient consultations. Community pharmacists mainly influenced prescribing through (a) medication reviews where the physician and/or practice nurse often were consulted to make treatment decisions, and (b) collaborative agreements with physicians to start or substitute medications in specific situations. These findings imply that the pharmacists' current roles in prescribing in the Netherlands resemble collaborative prescribing practices in other countries. We also identified several issues that should be addressed before formally introducing pharmacist prescribing, such as definitions of tasks and responsibilities and prescribing-specific training for pharmacists.

Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis of a clinical medication review focused on personal goals in older persons with polypharmacy compared to usual care: Economic evaluation of the DREAMeR study.

AIMS: The ageing society may lead to increasing healthcare expenditure. A clinical medication review (CMR) could potentially reduce costs. The aim of this study is to perform a cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis from a societal perspective of a patient-centred CMR. METHODS: A trial-based cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analysis was performed as part of the DREAMeR study, a pragmatic controlled trial that randomised patients aged ≥70 years using at least seven drugs to either CMR or usual care. Over six months, healthcare consumption and drug use were collected to estimate costs, and effects were collected in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) measured with EQ-5D-5 L and EQ-VAS and as reduced health-related complaints with impact on patients' daily lives. RESULTS: The total mean costs per patient (n = 588) over six months were €4,189 ± 6,596 for the control group (n = 294) and €4,008 ± 6,678 for the intervention group (n = 294), including estimated intervention costs of €199 ± 67, which resulted in a mean incremental total cost savings of €181 for the intervention group compared to the control group. Compared to the control group, for the intervention group, the mean incremental QALYs over six months were: -0.00217 measured with EQ-5D and 0.003 measured with EQ-VAS. The incremental effect of reduced health-related complaints with impact was -0.34. There was a likelihood of >90% that the intervention was cost-saving. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of a patient-centred CMR were inconsistent with no benefits on HR-QoL measured with EQ-5D-5 L and small benefits on HR-QoL measured with EQ-VAS and health-related complaints with impact on patients' daily lives. Additionally, a CMR could potentially be cost saving from a societal perspective.

Effects of a clinical medication review focused on personal goals, quality of life, and health problems in older persons with polypharmacy: A randomised controlled trial (DREAMeR-study).

BACKGROUND: Clinical medication reviews (CMRs) are increasingly performed in older persons with multimorbidity and polypharmacy to reduce drug-related problems (DRPs). However, there is limited evidence that a CMR can improve clinical outcomes. Little attention has been paid to patients' preferences and needs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a patient-centred CMR, focused on personal goals, on health-related quality of life (HR-QoL), and on number of health problems. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This study was a randomised controlled trial (RCT) performed in 35 community pharmacies and cooperating general practices in the Netherlands. Community-dwelling older persons (≥70 years) with polypharmacy (≥7 long-term medications) were randomly assigned to usual care or to receive a CMR. Randomisation was performed at the patient level per pharmacy using block randomisation. The primary outcomes were HR-QoL (assessed with EuroQol [EQ]-5D-5L and EQ-Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]) and number of health problems (such as pain or dizziness), after 3 and 6 months. Health problems were measured with a self-developed written questionnaire as the total number of health problems and number of health problems with a moderate to severe impact on daily life. Between April 2016 and February 2017, we recruited 629 participants (54% females, median age 79 years) and randomly assigned them to receive the intervention (n = 315) or usual care (n = 314). Over 6 months, in the intervention group, HR-QoL measured with EQ-VAS increased by 3.4 points (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 5.8; p = 0.006), and the number of health problems with impact on daily life decreased by 12% (difference at 6 months -0.34; 95% CI -0.62 to -0.044; p = 0.024) as compared with the control group. There was no significant difference between the intervention group and control group for HR-QoL measured with EQ-5D-5L (difference at 6 months = -0.0022; 95% CI -0.024 to 0.020; p = 0.85) or total number of health problems (difference at 6 months = -0.30; 95% CI -0.64 to 0.054; p = 0.099). The main study limitations include the risk of bias due to the lack of blinding and difficulties in demonstrating which part of this complex intervention (for example, goal setting, extra attention to patients, reducing health problems, drug changes) contributed to the effects that we observed. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that a CMR focused on personal goals improved older patients' lives and wellbeing by increasing quality of life measured with EQ-VAS and decreasing the number of health problems with impact on daily life, although it did not significantly affect quality of life measured with the EQ-5D. Including the patient's personal goals and preferences in a medication review may help to establish these effects on outcomes that are relevant to older patients' lives. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register; NTR5713.

DREAMeR: Drug use Reconsidered in the Elderly using goal Attainment scales during Medication Review; study protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical medication reviews (CMR) are increasingly performed in older patients with polypharmacy. Studies have shown positive effects of CMR on process- and intermediate outcomes, like drug-related problems (DRPs). Little effect has been shown on clinical outcomes, like hospital admissions or health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). In particular, HR-QoL is related to the individual health-related goals and complaints of patients. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of a CMR focused on personal goals on HR-QoL and health-related complaints in older patients with polypharmacy. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial will be performed in 35 Dutch community pharmacies aiming to include 630 patients aged 70 years and older using seven or more chronic drugs. Patients will be randomly assigned to control or intervention group by block-randomisation per pharmacy. Patients in the intervention group receive a CMR focused on patients' preferences, personal goals and health-related complaints. With every goal a goal attainment scale (GAS) will be proposed. Primary outcome measures are HR-QoL, measured with the EQ-5D-5L and EQ-VAS and the number of health-related complaints per patient measured with a written questionnaire, during a follow-up period of six months. Secondary outcomes are healthcare utilisation, number and type of drug changes, number and type of health-related goals, scores on GAS and number and type of DRPs and interventions. DISCUSSION: This study is expected to add evidence on the effects of a CMR on HR-QoL and health-related complaints in older patients with polypharmacy. New in this study is the use of personal goals measured with GAS and health-related complaints as patient-related outcome measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register; NTR5713 .

Majority of drug-related problems identified during medication review are not associated with STOPP/START criteria.

PURPOSE: STOPP and START criteria identify potential inappropriate prescribing and potential prescribing omissions. It is unknown whether STOPP/START criteria identify all drug-related problems. This study aims to determine to what extent STOPP/START correspond to drug-related problems (DRPs) identified during a full clinical medication review. METHODS: In 13 Dutch community pharmacies, 457 community-dwelling patients aged ≥65 years and using ≥5 drugs, received a full clinical medication review. Community pharmacists identified potential DRPs and recommendations by implicit criteria. After completion, all identified DRPs and recommendations were compared with STOPP and START criteria by investigators. RESULTS: The total number of potential DRPs identified by community pharmacists was 1656 in 457 patients (mean 3.6 per patient). Eighty-one percent of DRPs were not associated with STOPP/START criteria. The percentage of START criteria present in identified DRPs was higher than the percentage of STOPP criteria (13 vs. 5.7%, p < 0.01). The implementation rate for recommendations associated with STOPP criteria was higher compared to recommendations associated with START criteria (56 vs. 39%, p < 0.01). Both implementation rates of STOPP and START recommendations were lower compared to recommendations not associated with STOPP/START criteria (66%, p = 0.047 and p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that the majority of drug-related problems of community-dwelling older patients was not associated with STOPP/START criteria. These findings suggest that application of STOPP/START criteria in full clinical medication review should preferably be combined with implicit criteria.

Factors influencing the implementation of the CombiConsultation in Dutch clinical practice: a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: The CombiConsultation is an innovative concise clinical pharmacy service by the community pharmacist for patients with a chronic condition. We aimed to identify relevant factors influencing the implementation of the CombiConsultation in Dutch clinical practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods study involving interviews and a questionnaire. Content analysis topics within TDF domains were derived from the interview data and were related to the COM-B-model (capability-opportunity-motivation-Behaviour). The relevance of the resulting topics was explored using a questionnaire with 19 statements administered to all 27 pharmacists who performed CombiConsultations. KEY FINDINGS: Eighteen topics emerged from the interviews. The questionnaire was completed by 23 of the 27 pharmacists. In the domain 'capability', a small number of participants indicated that they need more expertise in pharmacotherapy (13%) and training in consultation skills (35%). In the domain 'opportunity', all participants indicated that an existing good collaboration with the general practitioner/practice nurse and access to all relevant medical data were necessary to implement the CombiConsultation. In terms of motivation, job satisfaction was most important to all participants, followed by adequate reimbursement (83%) and improving collaboration with other healthcare providers and the relationship with patients (78%). CONCLUSIONS: Capability, opportunity, and motivation were all considered relevant for the implementation of the CombiConsultation. There were crucial factors on the level of the individual pharmacist, on the level of the local collaboration and organization, and on the health system level.

Potential for pharmacist prescribing in primary care: A Dutch citizen perspective.

Background: Medication prescribing by pharmacists is a task shifting approach to help ensure quality and accessibility of healthcare. In many countries, like the Netherlands, pharmacist prescribing is not legally ensured, and it is unknown what citizens think of its potential introduction. Objective: To investigate citizen perspectives on the potential role of pharmacists in prescribing in primary care. Methods: A Citizen Platform with citizens (>18 years) from the Netherlands was conducted in October 2022. This consisted of a one-day program in which the participants were engaged in interactive assignments and received expert presentations to foster the development of informed opinions. In the final assignment, 3 participant groups designed their ideal future scenario including preconditions regarding the role of the pharmacist in prescribing in primary care. All assignments were recorded, and notes were taken. The researchers then consolidated the 3 scenarios into one version and categorized the preconditions. The Citizen Platform results were summarized and subsequently discussed in 2 online focus groups with other citizens in February 2023 to investigate the perspectives of less informed citizens. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Results: The Citizen Platform (n = 10) resulted in a shared scenario involving a primary care center where general practitioners (GPs) pharmacists and other healthcare professionals collaborate as a team. In this scenario, pharmacists can modify treatment in certain chronic diseases, manage minor ailments and support GPs with the care for patients with complex needs. Preconditions needed to realize this scenario include having shared medical records, the GP retaining the overview of the care for the patient and additional training for pharmacists. The focus groups (n = 6, in total) yielded 5 themes which acknowledge potential pharmacist prescribing but depict a more skeptical view towards pharmacist prescribing and include several concerns, for example pharmacists' potential conflict of interest. Conclusions: Citizens that are informed about opportunities for pharmacy prescribing are capable of sketching potential scenarios for pharmacist prescribing in a collaborative primary care context. Less informed citizens seem more skeptical towards pharmacist prescribing.

Medication adherence and knowledge of older patients with and without multidose drug dispensing.

OBJECTIVE: we compared the self-reported medication adherence and knowledge of older patients receiving their drugs via multidose drug dispensing (MDD users) with patients receiving manually dispensed drugs (non-MDD users). METHODS: MDD users (≥ 65 years, ≥ 5 oral chronic drugs) were randomly selected from eight Dutch community pharmacies. Non-MDD users (≥ 5 oral chronic drugs) were matched on age and gender. Medication adherence was assessed by using the Medication Adherence Reporting Scale (MARS) and medication knowledge by asking the indication of drugs. Cognitive function was measured with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for a sub selection of patients. RESULTS: the percentage of patients being adherent to all drugs was higher for MDD users (n = 119, 81%) compared with non-MDD users (n = 96, 58%, P < 0.001).The percentage of patients with adequate knowledge was lower for MDD users (40%) compared with non-MDD users (79%, P < 0.001). The differences in adherence were independent of knowledge and MMSE scores. CONCLUSION: this study shows that older patients receiving their drugs via MDD reported a higher medication adherence compared with patients receiving manually dispensed drugs, despite a lower knowledge and lower cognitive function among patients receiving MDD.

Barriers and facilitators for the implementation of the CombiConsultation by general practitioners, pharmacists and practice nurses: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: The CombiConsultation is a consultation with the pharmacist for patients with a chronic condition, aligned with the periodic consultation with the practice nurse or general practitioner. Implementation requires adjustments in the working methods of these healthcare providers and therefore behavioural changes. AIM: The aim of this study was to identify the barriers and facilitators that determine the behavioural changes by pharmacists, general practitioners and practice nurses required for the implementation of the CombiConsultation. METHOD: Ten community pharmacists, 5 practice nurses and 5 general practitioners were sampled from practices enrolled in the CombiConsultation study. Their views regarding the implementation of this clinical pharmacy service were explored using interviews based on the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which are linked to the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour-model. Barriers and facilitators in the domains were assessed by content analysis. RESULTS: Twelve barriers and 23 facilitators were found within 13 TDF domains with high agreement between the healthcare providers. Important facilitators for implementation were the pharmacists' expertise in pharmacotherapy (capability), access to medical data and physical proximity between professional practices (opportunity). Barriers were pharmacists' insufficient consultation- and clinical-reasoning skills (capability), insufficient staff (opportunity) and reimbursement and lack of coordination among all involved healthcare providers (motivation). CONCLUSION: All healthcare providers are motivated to implement the CombiConsultation. An existing collaborative practice, with a clear and accepted professional role of the pharmacist is essential. Training of pharmacists in consultation and clinical-reasoning skills can be beneficial, as well as arrangements on the consultation logistics, and reimbursement.

The CombiConsultation for patients with diabetes, COPD and cardiovascular diseases: Evaluation of interventions and personal health-related goals.

BACKGROUND: The CombiConsultation is a consultation with the community pharmacist for patients with diabetes, COPD and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD), aligned with the annual or quarterly consultation with the practice nurse (PN) or general practitioner (GP). The consultation is focused on the personal health-related goals of the patient. OBJECTIVES: To assess the number and types of personal health-related goals, drug-related problems (DRPs) and interventions identified by pharmacists during a CombiConsultation and to investigate which patients can benefit most from such consultation. METHOD: Twenty-one Dutch community pharmacies and associated GP practices were included in the CombiConsultation study. CombiConsultations were performed, involving patients with diabetes, COPD and/or (at risk of) CVD. The pharmacists set health-related goals together with the patients and identified DRPs. The number and types of personal health-related goals, DRPs and interventions were analysed. Associations between patient characteristics and the identification of at least one DRP were analysed by multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: In 834 patients (49% men, mean age: 70 years), 939 DRPs were identified, mostly (potential) side effects (33%), undertreatment (18%) and overtreatment (14%). In 71% of the patients, one or more DRPs were found, with a median of one DRP per patient. Pharmacists proposed 935 recommendations, of which 72% were implemented. DRPs were found more often in patients using a higher number of drugs for chronic conditions. A total of 425 personal health-related goals were set, of which 53% were (partially) attained. CONCLUSION: The CombiConsultation can be used as a compact health service contributing to safe and effective use of medication for patients with diabetes, COPD and/or (at risk of) CVD, also in patients under 65 or with less than 5 medications in use. The output of the CombiConsultation reflects its characteristics.

The CombiConsultation: a new concept of sequential consultation with the pharmacist and practice nurse/general practitioner for patients with a chronic condition.

The primary health care system is generally well organized for dealing with chronic diseases, but comprehensive medication management is still a challenge. Studies suggest that pharmacists can contribute to effective and safe drug therapy by providing services like a clinical medication review (CMR). However, several factors limit the potential impact of a CMR. Therefore, we propose a new pharmaceutical care service for patients with a chronic condition: the CombiConsultation. The CombiConsultation is a medication evaluation service conducted by the (community) pharmacist and either the practice nurse or general practitioner. It consists of 3 steps: medication check, implementation and follow-up. The pharmacist primarily focusses on setting treatment goals for 1 or 2 drug-related problems in relation to a specific chronic condition. In this manuscript we describe the process and characteristics of the CombiConsultation. We compare the CombiConsultation with the CMR and explain the choices made and the implications for implementation.

Effect of multidose drug dispensing on the time in therapeutic range in patients using vitamin-K antagonists: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A high number of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) users have a low proportion of time in therapeutic range (TTR) resulting in a high number of bleeding and thromboembolism events. OBJECTIVE: Can the quality of anticoagulation be improved by dispensing VKAs via multidose drug dispensing (MDD). METHOD: A randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands. Patients who used VKAs, ≥65 years of age with a TTR <65% were eligible for inclusion. All oral drugs were dispensed via MDD. In MDD systems, all oral chronic medication intended for one dosing moment is packed in plastic disposable pouches. Controls received VKAs by manual dispensing. The difference in TTR between the 6 months after- and 6 months before the index date. A mixed-effects model with the intervention, TTR before the index date, MDD system at baseline as covariates, and pharmacy as random effect. A per-protocol analysis was performed with all patients who completed the study as intended. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-nine patients were included. Mean age was 80.0 (SD 6.9) years. Mean TTR during the study was 79.2 ± 18.0% in the intervention group and 72.5 ± 20.1% in the control group. The intervention resulted in a 5.6% (95% CI: 0.1-11.1) increase in TTR compared to the control group. Per-protocol analysis resulted in an 8.3% (95% CI: 0.99-15.61) increase in TTR compared to the control group. No differences in reduction were observed between the intervention and control group. CONCLUSION: The quality of anticoagulation can be improved with the use of MDD systems.

Immediate or deferred adjustment of drug regimens in multidose drug dispensing systems.

BACKGROUND: Multidose drug dispensing (MDD) is used to help patients take their medicines appropriately. Little is known about drug regimen changes within these MDD systems and how they are effectuated by the community pharmacist. Manual immediate adjustments of the MDD system could introduce dispensing errors. MDD guidelines therefore recommend to effectuate drug regimen changes at the start of a new MDD system. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency, type, procedure followed, immediate necessity, and time taken to make MDD adjustments. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study in eight community pharmacies in the Netherlands. All adjustments to MDD systems were systematically documented for 3 weeks by the community pharmacist. RESULTS: Overall, 261 MDD adjustments involving 364 drug changes were documented for 250 patients: 127 (35%) drug changes involved the addition of a new drug, 124 (34%) a change in dosage, and 95 (26%) drug discontinuation. Of the MDD adjustments, 135 (52%) were effectuated immediately: 81 (31%) by adjusting the MDD system manually, 49 (19%) by temporarily dispensing the drug separately from the MDD system, and 5 (2%) by ordering a new MDD system. Pharmacists considered that 36 (27%) of the immediate MDD adjustments could have been deferred until the next MDD system was produced. Immediate adjustment took significantly longer than deferred adjustment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in patients using MDD systems, over half of the drug regimen changes are adjusted immediately. The necessity of these immediate changes should be critically evaluated.

Patients' experiences with multidose drug dispensing: a cross sectional study.

Background Automated multidose drug dispensing is used to support patients with their medication management. Though multidose drug dispensing systems are frequently used, little is known about patients' experiences with multidose drug dispensing systems. Objective To explore patients' experiences with the initiation and use of multidose drug dispensing systems. Setting A survey was carried out with patients using multidose drug dispensing systems through three community pharmacies. Method A semi-structured interview protocol was designed based on existing literature and a pilot study. Main outcome measures The main outcome measures were (1) patients' experiences with initiating multidose drug dispensing systems and (2) patients' experienced advantages and disadvantages of multidose drug dispensing systems. Results The start of multidose drug dispensing was discussed with 76% of the patients (n = 62). Ninety percent of patients expressed the opinion that the multidose drug dispensing system supported them with their medication management. Sixty patients reported 110 advantages, which can be organized into the following categories: improved medication adherence and medication safety (59%); patient's convenience (40%); and other (1%). Sixty-nine percent of patients reported no disadvantages, 24% had problems opening the bags or outer packaging and 13% had problems with the legibility of the printed text on the bag. Conclusion In concordance with the Dutch guideline, patients are generally involved in the decision to initiate an multidose drug dispensing system. Patients are very satisfied using the system and report multiple advantages. Multidose drug dispensing systems may be further improved by simplifying the manual opening of the bags and improving the legibility of the text on the bags.

The use of goal attainment scaling during clinical medication review in older persons with polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that a clinical medication review (CMR) reduces drug-related problems (DRPs), but the effects on clinical outcomes are less clear. Perhaps, CMRs in older persons could me more effective when they focus on patients' personal goals and health-related complaints. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether goal attainment scaling (GAS) is a useful tool for determining goals and monitoring their attainment during CMR. METHODS: This study was an analysis based on data of the intervention group of the DREAMeR-study; a randomised controlled trial investigating the effects of CMR in primary care. 315 persons aged ≥70 years using ≥7 drugs were randomised to the intervention: a CMR focused on personal goals using GAS. Outcome measures were: percentage of persons with health-related goals, attainment of goals measured with GAS-scores after three and six months, type of health-related goals and implementation rates of recommendations for GAS-related DRPs and other DRPs. RESULTS: A total of 406 health-related goals were set for 283 of 315 included persons (90%). Of the 350 evaluated goals (86%), 37% was attained after three months and 43% after six months. The goals 'reduce pain' (n = 66, 16%), 'improve mobility' (n = 57, 14%) and 'reduce number of pills' (n = 37, 9.1%) were most prevalent. The implementation rate of recommendations for GAS-related DRPs was 81% compared to 62% for not GAS-related DRPs (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Goal setting is important for prioritizing the most important problems during clinical medication review and Goal Attainment Scaling seems to be a useful tool for monitoring the attainment of these goals.

[Medication review in older people: identification of a new risk group]. / Medicatiebeoordeling bij ouderen: identificatie van een nieuwe risicogroep.

The Dutch multidisciplinary guideline on 'Polypharmacy in older people' advises performing an annual medication review for patients aged 65 or older who use five or more drugs and have at least one risk factor for negative outcomes of their drug usage. We describe a 79-year-old male patient with an indication for a medication review and identified drug-related problems (DRPs). Furthermore, we describe two female patients aged 97 and 91 who use fewer than five drugs, dispensed via an automated system, and also have DRPs. We suggest adding the use of a multidose drug-dispensing system as an indication for a medication review. This will also help to identify patients with undertreatment. In addition, we recommend improving collaboration with pharmacists, which may enhance the effect of a medication review by increasing the number of drug changes.

The relationship between the extent of collaboration of general practitioners and pharmacists and the implementation of recommendations arising from medication review: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have investigated the effect of medication review on a variety of outcomes, but the elements of the interventions have been quite diverse. Moreover, implementation rates of recommendations also vary widely between studies. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate how the extent of collaboration between the general practitioner (GP) and the pharmacist impacts on the implementation of recommendations arising from medication review. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched for studies published between January 2000 and April 2012. Keywords included medication review, medication therapy management, pharmaceutical services and drug utilization review. Sixteen articles (describing 14 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) out of 620 titles met the inclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria for the review were medication review, RCT design, involvement of both pharmacist and GP, and home-dwelling patients (mean age >70 years) who had not been recently discharged. After quality assessment of the article, the presence of the following eight key elements reflecting collaboration were scored for each intervention: pharmacist with clinical experience, own pharmacist involved, sharing of medical records, patient interview by pharmacist, invitation of patients by GP, case conference between GP and pharmacist, action plan, follow-up. The primary outcome was the implementation rate of recommendations. Meta-regression analysis was used to assess the association between the implementation rate and the number of key elements present. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs were included after quality assessment. The mean number of key elements within the intervention was 5.2 (range 1-8). The mean implementation rate of recommendations was 50 % (range 17-86). The association between the number of key elements present in the intervention and the implementation rate of recommendations was significant: ß = 0.085 (95 % CI 0.052-0.128; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows a significant association between the number of key elements of the intervention reflecting collaborative aspects in medication review and the implementation rate of recommendations.

Effects of medication review on drug-related problems in patients using automated drug-dispensing systems: a pragmatic randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: There are concerns that automated drug dispensing may increase inappropriate drug use. Automated dispensing could lead to perpetual repeating of drug therapies without the necessary re-evaluation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of a pharmacist-led medication review on drug-related problems (DRPs) in older patients receiving their drugs via automated dispensing. METHODS: This was a pragmatic randomized controlled study conducted in primary care. Patients were recruited from six Dutch community pharmacies. They were eligible if they lived at home, were aged ≥ 65 years, and used five or more different drugs, of which at least one had to be dispensed via an automated system. Patients were randomly allocated to receive a medication review at the start of the study (intervention group) or after 6 months (waiting-list group). Each patient was independently reviewed by two pharmacist reviewers. The results of these medication reviews were sent to the community pharmacist to be discussed with the patient's general practitioner (GP). The primary outcome measure was the number of DRPs leading to a recommendation for drug change. Secondary outcomes were the total number of drug changes and the number of drug changes related to a recommendation. In order to analyse drug changes, medication records were collected 6 months after the medication review or index date in the waiting-list group. Potential DRPs were classified using the DOCUMENT classification. RESULTS: There were no baseline differences between the 63 patients in the intervention group and the 55 patients in the waiting-list group with respect to age, sex, number of drugs per patient and type of drug prescribed. The mean number of DRPs per patient at baseline in the intervention group and waiting list combined was 8.5, with no difference between the groups. At baseline, the mean number of DRPs leading to a recommendation for drug change was 4.5 per patient and did not differ between the two groups. After 6 months, the number of DRPs leading to a recommendation for drug change decreased by 29% in the intervention group versus 5% in the waiting-list group (p < 0.01). Recommendations for cessation of a drug were more frequently accepted than recommendations to add a new drug (82% vs 44%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that patients using automated drug dispensing have a high number of DRPs. Medication review decreases the number of DRPs among these patients. We recommend that all patients with automatic drug dispensing should have a thorough medication review by pharmacists and prescribers.