Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMC Fam Pract ; 19(1): 3, 2018 01 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29304725

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although polypharmacy can cause adverse health outcomes, patients often know little about their medication. A regularly conducted medication review (MR) can help provide an overview of a patient's medication, and benefit patients by enhancing their knowledge of their drugs. As little is known about patient attitudes towards MRs in primary care, the objective of this study was to gain insight into patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of an MR. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with a convenience sample of 31 patients (age ≥ 60 years, ≥3 chronic diseases, taking ≥5 drugs/d); in Hesse, Germany, in February 2016. We conducted two focus groups and, in order to ensure the participation of elderly patients with reduced mobility, 16 telephone interviews. Both relied on a semi-structured interview guide dealing with the following subjects: patients' experience of polypharmacy, general design of MRs, potential barriers and facilitators to implementation etc. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed by two researchers using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients' average age was 74 years (range 62-88 years). We identified barriers and facilitators for four main topics regarding the implementation of MRs in primary care: patient participation, GP-led MRs, pharmacist-led MRs, and the involvement of healthcare assistants in MRs. Barriers to patient participation concerned patient autonomy, while facilitators involved patient awareness of medication-related problems. Barriers to GP-led MRs concerned GP's lack of resources while facilitators related to the trusting relationship between patient and GP. Pharmacist-led MRs might be hindered by a lack of patients' confidence in pharmacists' expertise, but facilitated by pharmacies' digital records of the patients' medications. Regarding the involvement of healthcare assistants in MRs, a potential barrier was patients' uncertainty regarding the extent of their training. Patients could, however, imagine GPs delegating some aspects of MRs to them. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that patients regard MRs as beneficial and expect indications for their medicines to be checked, and possible interactions to be identified. To foster the implementation of MRs in primary care, it is important to consider barriers and facilitators to the four identified topics.


Asunto(s)
Barreras de Comunicación , Servicios Comunitarios de Farmacia/normas , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico , Educación del Paciente como Asunto/métodos , Farmacéuticos , Atención Primaria de Salud , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Femenino , Alemania , Humanos , Masculino , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico/organización & administración , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico/normas , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Necesidades , Polifarmacia , Atención Primaria de Salud/métodos , Atención Primaria de Salud/normas , Rol Profesional , Investigación Cualitativa , Mejoramiento de la Calidad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA