Exploring the perspectives and strategies of Ontario community pharmacists to improve routine follow-up for patients with diabetes: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Medication reviews are a fundamental activity carried out as part of comprehensive care delivered by pharmacists. Varying programs that reimburse pharmacists for conduct of medication reviews are in place in different jurisdictions in Canada and other countries around the world. The MedsCheck Diabetes (MCD) program is a publicly funded service in Ontario, Canada, offered to patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Through this service, pharmacists can complete a focused medication review with advice, training, monitoring and follow-up diabetes education. Although pharmacists can be reimbursed for patient follow-up activities, a low number of follow-up medication reviews are billed through this program. METHODS: The study explores the barriers and facilitators that community pharmacists in Ontario experience in conducting routine monitoring and follow-up of patients with diabetes. Using a descriptive content analysis approach study, semistructured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 8 community pharmacists working in Ontario. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: the design of the MCD program, the state of community pharmacy and collaboration and relationships. These themes demonstrate challenges and potential strategies recognized by community pharmacists to conduct routine diabetes follow-up through the MCD program. CONCLUSION: This study found that the design of the MedsCheck Diabetes program, the community pharmacy environment and the relationships between pharmacists, patients and prescribers can pose a challenge in the conduct of routine monitoring and follow-up through the MedsCheck Diabetes program.

Audit of community pharmacists' prescribing interventions: Quality assessment of a newly reimbursed service.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate community pharmacists' reimbursed prescribing interventions (called pharmaceutical opinions/POs in Canada) by determining the types of drug-related problems (DRPs) identified; the type, quality, and clinical impact of recommendations made; and variation in recommendation quality across regions, pharmacy ownership type, and pharmacy size. DESIGN: Retrospective audit of randomly sampled service documentation records. SETTING: Community pharmacies in Ontario, Canada, 3 years after implementation of a government program that reimburses pharmacies for providing DRP-based POs to physicians. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-six community pharmacies in 4 regions of Ontario. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each PO, 2 experienced clinical pharmacists independently, and then by consensus, determined the primary drug implicated and its therapeutic category, the type of DRP, and the type of prescriber recommendation. Each PO recommendation was assessed for clinical impact, evidence base, and overall quality. Chi-square analyses assessed the relationship between PO quality and pharmacy characteristics. RESULTS: Of 563 POs, 261 (46%) met reimbursement criteria for stating a DRP and prescriber recommendation. Among these eligible POs, systemic antiinfective (22%), alimentary tract and metabolism (19%), nervous system (15%), and cardiovascular (15%) drugs were most commonly identified in the DRP. Adverse drug reactions (which included drug interactions) were the most common type of DRP (42.5%), followed by "dose too high" (16%) and "needs additional therapy" (14%). Top recommendations were to change the drug (41%) and to decrease the dose (20%). The quality of the pharmacist's recommendation was judged to be good to excellent in 70% of the 261 eligible POs; quality was associated with region and ownership type. CONCLUSION: PO quality was suboptimal: the primary issue was failure to state a prescriber recommendation. Collaborative efforts are needed from community pharmacy stakeholders (schools of pharmacy, regulatory colleges, and continuing education providers) to help pharmacists enhance the quality of their POs, beginning with their clinical documentation skills.

Pharmacists report lack of reinforcement and the work environment as the biggest barriers to routine monitoring and follow-up for people with diabetes: A survey of community pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Medications with lifestyle are the cornerstone of diabetes management and routine monitoring and follow-up are essential to the delivery of quality care. Documented follow-up rates by pharmacists for people with diabetes are low despite good uptake of initial medication assessments in medication review programs. OBJECTIVES: Identify the barriers and facilitators to routine monitoring and follow-up for people with diabetes by community pharmacists. METHODS: Pharmacists were invited to complete a survey designed using the Theoretical Domains Framework Version 2 TDF (v2) consisting of 39 questions based on the 14 domains of the TDFv2 with quantitative response options using a 7 point Likert scale and 2 open-ended questions. Baseline information about the respondents and their practice sites were summarized using descriptive statistics. Mean scores and standard deviations were calculated for each of the Likert scale responses. Responses to open-ended questions were analyzed and coded using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: 346 pharmacists completed the survey (4.76% response rate). The TDF domains found to be positively influencing the delivery of routine monitoring and follow-up activities were beliefs about consequences for people with diabetes (6.08 ± 1.13), pharmacist knowledge (5.93 ± 0.99), pharmacist skills (5.44 ± 1.44), social influences (5.36 ± 1.32) and optimism (5.20 ± 1.58). The domains found to be negatively influencing were reinforcement (3.0 ± 1.89) and environmental context and resources (3.30 ± 1.81). Themes emerging from the thematic analysis included time and competing priorities, reimbursement, patient engagement, workflow and human resources, access to labs and clinical information, information technology and support from the owner/manager. CONCLUSIONS: Our research concludes that pharmacists report that their knowledge, skills, and beliefs about their role and responsibility, social influences and optimism are positive influences on routine monitoring and follow-up while reinforcement and the environmental context/resources are the greatest negative influences. Strategies to improve follow-up should be focused in these areas.

Safe Use of Metformin in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease: Lower Dosages and Sick-Day Education Are Essential.

Metformin, together with lifestyle intervention, is considered first-line treatment for glycemic management in people with type 2 diabetes. Despite this widespread use, one of the areas of longstanding debate has been whether metformin can be used safely in those with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The concern is the possibility of an increased risk for lactic acidosis resulting from metformin accumulation in those with renal impairment. Options in this patient population are limited, and many believe this risk has been overstated, so several organizations around the world have made recommendations to allow for the cautious use of metformin in patients with CKD. Lalau and colleagues have added new evidence with the publication of 3 complementary studies of the use of metformin in people with CKD stages 3A, 3B or 4-a dose-finding study, a chronic metformin treatment study and a pharmacokinetic study. The authors tested adjusted dosage regimens based on level of CKD. The study demonstrates that although there is a relationship between eGFR and metformin levels, there is not a relationship between metformin levels and plasma lactate. In addition, as long as the metformin dosage was adjusted to the level of CKD, pharmacokinetics remained stable. Based on this new evidence, together with past epidemiologic data and systematic reviews, metformin appears to be a safe option for patients with CKD, assuming that the dosage is adjusted individually. Stopping the drug during acute illness is also imperative to ensure its safe use.

Impact of the 2016 Policy Change on the Delivery of MedsCheck Services in Ontario: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.

MedsCheck (MC) is an annual medication review service delivered by community pharmacists and funded by the government of Ontario since 2007 for residents taking three or more medications for chronic conditions. In 2010, MC was expanded to include patients with diabetes (MCD), home-bound patients (MCH), and residents of long-term care homes (MCLTC). The Ontario government introduced an abrupt policy change effective 1 October 2016 that added several components to all MC services, especially those completed in the community. We used an interrupted time series design to examine the impact of the policy change (24 months pre- and post-intervention) on the monthly number of MedsCheck services delivered. Immediate declines in all services were identified, especially in the community (47%-64% drop MC, 71%-83% drop MCD, 55% drop MCH, and 9%-14% drop MCLTC). Gradual increases were seen over 24 months post-policy change, yet remained 21%-76% lower than predicted for MedsCheck services delivered in the community, especially for MCD. In contrast, MCLTC services were similar or exceeded predicted values by September 2018 (from 5.1% decrease to 3.5% increase). A more effective implementation of health policy changes is needed to ensure the feasibility and sustainability of professional community pharmacy services.

Community pharmacists' perspectives on shared decision-making in diabetes management.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision-making (SDM) is an approach where patients and clinicians share evidence and patients are supported to deliberate options resulting in preference-based informed decisions. The aim of this study was to describe community pharmacists' perceptions and awareness of SDM within their provision of general diabetes management [including Ontario's MedsCheck for Diabetes (MCD) programme], and potential challenges of implementing SDM within community pharmacy. METHODS: This qualitative study used semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of community pharmacists. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. KEY FINDINGS: We conducted 16 interviews. Six participants were male, and nine were certified diabetes educators. When providing a MCD, participants used aspects of a patient-centred approach focusing on providing education. Variation was evident in participants' description and use of SDM, as well as in their perceived level of training in SDM. Participants also highlighted challenges surrounding implementing a SDM approach in practice. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists are well positioned to apply SDM within community settings; however, implementation barriers exist. Pharmacists will require additional training as well as perceived patient and physician barriers should be addressed to encourage uptake.

Insights Into the Current Management of Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes in the Ontario Primary Care Setting.

OBJECTIVE: The Goal Oriented controL of Diabetes in the Elderly populatioN (GOLDEN) Program assessed the management of older persons with type 2 diabetes in Canadian primary care. METHODS: Data were extracted from the records of 833 consecutively identified persons 65 years of age or older who had type 2 diabetes and were taking 1 antihyperglycemic agent or more; they were managed by 64 physicians from 36 Ontario clinics. RESULTS: More than half (53%) had glycated hemoglobin (A1C) levels of 7.0% or lower, 41% had blood pressure levels below 130/80 mm Hg, and 73% had low-density lipoprotein levels of 2.0 mmol/L or lower; 19% met all 3 criteria. Over the past year, 11% had been assessed for frailty, 16% for cognitive dysfunction and 19% for depression; 88% were referred for eye checkups, and 83% had undergone foot examinations. One-tenth were taking 4 or more antihyperglycemic agents, 87% statins and 52% an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. More than half of those with high clinical complexity had A1C levels of 7.0% or lower; of these, one-third were taking a sulfonylurea, and one-fifth were taking insulin. In the patients with A1C levels of 7.0% or above and low clinical complexity, there was often no up-titration or initiation of additional antihyperglycemic agents. CONCLUSIONS: Older persons with type 2 diabetes often have multiple comorbidities. Unlike eye and foot examinations, there was less emphasis on evaluating for frailty, cognitive dysfunction and depression. The GOLDEN patients had generally well-controlled glycemic, blood pressure and cholesterol profiles, but whether these would be reflected in a "sicker" population is not known. Personalized strategies are necessary to avoid undertreatment of "healthy" older patients and overtreatment of the frail elderly.

Uptake of Community Pharmacist-Delivered MedsCheck Diabetes Medication Review Service in Ontario between 2010 and 2014.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of MedsCheck Diabetes (MCD) recipients in Ontario between program launch on September 1, 2010, and March 31, 2014. METHODS: This cohort study leveraged linked administrative claims data. Trends in MCD claims and recipient characteristics were examined. RESULTS: A total of 406,694 Ontarians (45.8% women) received an MCD, representing approximately half of all Ontarians with diabetes. Recipients were more likely to be <66 years of age (54.6%), live in an urban centre (94.6%) and be native to Canada (81.0%). A total of 13,587 MCD follow ups were completed (4.1% of MCD recipients ≥66 years of age and 2.7% of MCD recipients <66 years of age). MCD recipients ≥66 years of age had received a mean of 11 unique prescription medications in the previous year, prior to receiving an MCD, and 12.9% had had high medication costs ($4000+) in the previous year. Metformin was dispensed to 76.4% of recipients, insulin to 20.1% and insulin secretagogues to 36.2%. The most common medication classes used by MCD recipients, other than antihyperglycemics, were antihypertensives (89.5%), antilipid therapies (83.8%), diuretics (52.1%), antibiotics (38.2%) and gastroprotective agents (34.9%). They were also taking high-risk medications, including narcotics (25.4%), anticoagulants (23.3%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (21.5%), benzodiazepines (15.5%) and glyburide (15.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Over the first 3.5 years of the program, approximately half of Ontarians with diabetes received an MCD. Follow-up assessments were low (2.7% to 4.1% of the population). Ongoing evaluation of the program is required to ensure that continuity of care is being provided to this population.

Community Pharmacists' Perspectives of a Decision Aid for Managing Type 2 Diabetes in Ontario.

OBJECTIVES: Decision aids are tools designed to help patients make choices about their health care. We explored pharmacists' perceptions of an evidence-based diabetes decision aid developed by the Mayo Clinic, Diabetes Medication Choice (DMC). Using DMC as a reference, we aimed to explore pharmacists' perspectives on decision aids, their place in a community pharmacy setting and the implementing of a decision aid, such as DMC, in Ontario. METHODS: We used semistructured interviews with a convenience sample of community pharmacists from Ontario. We applied a thematic analysis to the data. RESULTS: We conducted 16 interviews with pharmacists, of whom 9 were certified diabetes educators, and 10 were female. Three themes emerged from the data: pharmacists' knowledge and awareness of decision aids; pharmacists' perceptions of the DMC decision aids, and implementation of the DMC decision aids in Ontario pharmacies. Participants discussed their limited experience with and training in the use of decision aids. Although many participants agreed that the DMC decision aids may contribute to patient-centred care, all agreed that significant changes were needed to be made to implement this tool in practice. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacists felt that the use of decision aids in community pharmacies in Ontario may improve patient-centred care. Modifications, however, are needed to improve the applicability to their context and fit into their workflow. Empirical data concerning the impact of decision aids in community pharmacy is needed.

Optimal medication dosing in patients with diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease.

Diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Canada. As rates of diabetes rise, so does the prevalence of CKD. Diabetes and CKD are chronic diseases that require multiple medications for their management. Many of the anticipated effects of these medications are altered by the physiologic changes that occur in CKD. Failure to individualize drug dosing in this population may lead to toxicity or decreased therapeutic response, leading to treatment failure. At times this can be challenging for a multitude of reasons, including the limitations of available calculations for estimating renal function, inconsistent dosing recommendations and the lack of dosing recommendations for some medications. Clinicians caring for these patients need to consider an approach of individualized drug therapy that will ensure optimal outcomes. The better understanding that clinicians have of these challenges, the more effective they will be at using the available information as a guide together with their own professional judgement to make appropriate dosing changes. This article discusses the following: 1) physiologic changes that occur in CKD and its impact on drug dosing; 2) advantages and disadvantages of various calculations used for estimating renal function; 3) pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes of some commonly used medications in diabetes, and finally, 4) an approach to individualized drug dosing for this patient population.

Use of an interdisciplinary, participatory design approach to develop a usable patient self-assessment tool in atrial fibrillation.

After identifying that significant care gaps exist within the management of atrial fibrillation (AF), a patient-focused tool was developed to help patients better assess and manage their AF. This tool aims to provide education and awareness regarding the management of symptoms and stroke risk associated with AF, while engaging patients to identify if their condition is optimally managed and to become involved in their own care. An interdisciplinary group of health care providers and designers worked together in a participatory design approach to develop the tool with input from patients. Usability testing was completed with 22 patients of varying demographics to represent the characteristics of the patient population. The findings from usability testing interviews were used to further improve and develop the tool to improve ease of use. A physician-facing tool was also developed to help to explain the tool and provide a brief summary of the 2012 Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines. By incorporating patient input and human-centered design with the knowledge, experience, and medical expertise of health care providers, we have used an approach in developing the tool that tries to more effectively meet patients' needs.