Patients' Experiences Using a Brief Screening Tool for Medication-Related Problems in a Community Pharmacy Setting.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore patient perceptions and the practical implication of using a brief 9-item scale to screen for medication-related problems in community pharmacies. METHODS: Semistructured, audio-recorded, telephonic interviews were conducted with 40 patients who completed the scale and reviewed its results with their pharmacist. Audio recordings were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative methods to identify themes. RESULTS: Patients generally reported the scale was simple to complete and could be used easily in other community pharmacies. Participants shared they had increased understanding of their medications and confidence that their medication therapy was appropriate. Several patients reported having actual medication-related problems identified and resolved through the use of the scale. Patients also reported improved relationships with pharmacists and heightened belief in the value provided by pharmacists. CONCLUSIONS: This screening tool may have value in increasing patients' understanding of and confidence in their medications, enhancing pharmacist-patient relationships, and identifying problems requiring additional interventions.

Using the Pharmacist Interaction Tracking Tool for Capturing Student-Patient Interactions in Direct and Simulated Patient Care Activities.

Objective. To create and implement a standardized data collection tool for capturing student-patient interactions in direct and simulated patient care activities. Design. Faculty members and students determined key elements, design, and an implementation plan for the tool, which was to be used by students across professional years to quantify numbers and types of interactions with patients for tracking student progression toward achievement of curricular outcomes. Assessment. During the 2013-2014 academic year, 27 778 entries were completed, with 17 767 (64%) advanced pharmacy practice experiences, 7272 (26%) introductory pharmacy practice experiences, and 2739 (10%) simulation. Direct patient care interactions occurred with 11 090 patients and 10 983 providers, with 14 252 drug-related problems identified. Data was used by students for their professional portfolios, by administrators for curricular assessment, and to student impact on patient care. Conclusion. The PITT Form enabled the collection of data from actual and simulated patient care activities, allowed for curricular assessment of activities across years, and was used by individual students.

Utility of a brief screening tool for medication-related problems.

BACKGROUND: Medication therapy management (MTM) services position pharmacists to prevent, detect, and resolve medication-related problems (MRPs.) However, selecting patients for MTM who are most at risk for MRPs is a challenge. Using self-administered scales that are practical for use in clinical practice are one approach. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the psychometric properties of a brief self-administered scale as a screening tool for MRPs. METHODS: This was a non-randomized study utilizing questionnaires administered cross-sectionally. In Phase 1, patients (n = 394) at community pharmacies and outpatient clinics completed 78 items, provided to the study team by item authors, assessing perceived MRPs. These data were used to select items for further investigation as a brief, self-administered scale, and estimate the reliability and construct validity of the resulting instrument. In Phase 2, a convenience sample of patients (n = 200) at community pharmacies completed a nine-item, self-administered scale. After completion, they were engaged in a comprehensive medication review by their pharmacist who was blinded to questionnaire responses. The main outcome measure for estimating the criterion-related validity of the scale was the number of pharmacist-identified medication-related problems (MRPs.) Item statistics were computed as well as bivariate associations between scale scores and other variables with MRPs. A multivariate model was constructed to examine the influence of scale scores on MRPs after controlling for other significant variables. RESULTS: Higher scores on the questionnaire were positively correlated with more pharmacist-identified MRPs (r = 0.24; P = 0.001) and scores remained as a significant predictor (P = 0.031) when controlling for other relevant variables in a multivariate regression model (R(2) = 0.21; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patient responses on the scale may have a modest role in predicting MRPs. The use of self-administered questionnaires such as this may supplement other available patient data in developing patient eligibility criteria for MTM, however, additional research is warranted.

Predictors of medication-related problems among medicaid patients participating in a pharmacist-provided telephonic medication therapy management program.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of medication-related problems (MRPs) among Medicaid patients participating in a telephonic medication therapy management (MTM) program. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of data from patients enrolled in a previously published study. DATA SOURCES: Two Medicaid administrative claims file databases (for health care utilization and prescription dispensing information) and one pharmacy organization file for MTM program information. PATIENTS: Seven hundred twelve adult Medicaid patients who participated in a statewide pharmacist-provided telephone-based MTM program and who received an initial medication therapy review. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary dependent variable was the number of MRPs detected during the initial medication therapy review. Secondary dependent variables were the detection of one or more MRPs related to indication, effectiveness, safety, and adherence. Predictor variables were selected a priori that, from the literature and our own practice experiences, were hypothesized as being potentially associated with MRPs: demographics, comorbidities, medication use, and health care utilization. Bivariate analyses were performed, and multivariable models were constructed. All predictor variables with significant associations (defined a priori as p<0.1) with the median number of MRPs detected were then entered into a three-block multiple linear regression model. The overall model was significant (p<0.001, R(2)  = 0.064). Significant predictors of any MRPs (p<0.05) were total number of medications, obesity, dyslipidemia, and one or more emergency department visits in the past 3 months. For indication-related MRPs, the model was significant (p<0.001, R(2)  = 0.049), and predictors included female sex, obesity, dyslipidemia, and total number of medications (p<0.05). For effectiveness-related MRPs, the model was significant (p<0.001, R(2)  = 0.054), and predictors included bone disease and dyslipidemia (p<0.05). For safety-related MRPs, the model was significant (p<0.001, R(2)  = 0.046), and dyslipidemia was a predictor (p<0.05). No significant predictors of adherence-related MRPs were identified. CONCLUSION: This analysis supports the relative importance of number of medications as a predictor of MRPs in the Medicaid population and identifies other predictors. However, given the models' low R(2) values, these findings indicate that other unknown factors are clearly important and that criteria commonly used for determining MTM eligibility may be inadequate in identifying appropriate patients for MTM in a Medicaid population.

Best practices for implementing team-based learning in pharmacy education.

Colleges and schools of pharmacy are incorporating more team-based learning (TBL) into their curriculum. Published resources are available to assist instructors with implementing TBL and describing it in the health professions literature. The 7 core elements include: team formation, readiness assurance, immediate feedback, sequencing of in-class problem solving, the 4 "S" structure for developing team application exercises (significant problem, same problem, specific answer choice, simultaneous reporting), incentive structure, and peer evaluation. This paper summarizes best practices related to implementation of TBL in pharmacy education, including courses taught using teaching teams.

Pilot assessment of patient satisfaction and clinical impact of Medicare Part D in diabetic geriatric patients

Objectives: To assess patients’ 1) satisfaction with their decision to enroll or not enroll in the Medicare Part D program, and 2) clinical status of diabetes before and after decision to enroll in Medicare Part D. Methods: Patients 65 years or older were enrolled in the study from November 2006 through February 2007. Patients were screened by a clinical pharmacist at their clinician visit and administered a Medicare Part D satisfaction survey. Upon completion of the survey, a retrospective chart review was completed in diabetic patients who were enrolled in Medicare Part D to assess goal attainment of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and blood pressure. Pre-enrollment values were obtained in the 6 months prior to the start of Medicare Part D enrollment (July 1- December 31, 2005). Post-enrollment values were obtained after enrollment was complete for the 2006 year (May 1- October 31, 2006). Results: Results show that 74% (60/81) of patients surveyed were enrolled into the Medicare Part D program, including patients who have dual eligibility. Of the 60 patients who were enrolled in Medicare Part D, 48 patients (80.0%) responded that they were satisfied with their decision to enroll. Clinical outcomes were unchanged from the pre-enrollment to the post-enrollment periods. Mean HbA1c was 7.47% in the pre-enrollment period and 7.25% post-enrollment (difference pre-post = 0.23; 95%CI = -0.28 to 0.73). There was no change in LDL in the two time periods (pre = 79.4 mg/dL; post = 79.7; difference pre-post = -0.25; 95%CI = -13.6 to 13.1). Similarly, there were no significant differences observed for blood pressure. Mean systolic blood pressure was 129.5 in the pre-enrollment period and 131.6 in the post-enrollment period (difference pre-post = -2.1; 95%CI = -7.0 to 2.7). Mean diastolic blood pressure was 70.3 for the pre-enrollment period and 70.7 for the post-enrollment period (difference pre-post = -0.4; 95%CI = -4.2 to 3.4). Conclusion: Patients were generally satisfied with their decision to enroll in Medicare Part D. Clinical outcomes were not affected by participation in a Medicare Part D plan. More longitudinal studies are necessary to determine long term impact of Medicare Part D on diabetes management (AU)

Objetivos: Evaluar 1) la satisfacción de los pacientes con la decisión de incluirlos o no en el programa de Medicare Part D, y 2) el estado clínico de la diabetes antes y después de incluirlos en el Medicare Part D. Métodos: Se incluyeron en el estudio pacientes de 65 o más años desde noviembre 2006 a febrero 2007. Los pacientes fueron cribados por un farmacéutico clínico en su visita clínica y se les administró una encuesta de satisfacción sobre Medicare Part D. Después de completar la encuesta, se realizó una revisión del historial en los pacientes diabéticos incluidos en Medicare Part D, para evaluar la consecución de objetivos de hemoglobina glicosilada (HbA1c), lipoproteínas de baja densidad (LDL) y presión sanguínea. Los valores pre-inclusión se obtuvieron en los 6 meses anteriores a comenzar la inclusión en Medicare Part D (1-jul a 31-dic). Los valores post-inclusión se obtuvieron en el año 2006 (1-may a 31-oct). Resultados: El 74% de los pacientes se incluyeron en el programa Medicare Part D, incluyendo los pacientes que tenían doble elegibilidad. De los 60 pacientes incluidos en Medicare Part D, 48 (80,0%) respondieron que estaban satisfechos con la decisión de incluirse. Los resultados clínicos no variaron del periodo pre- al periodo post-inclusión. La HbA1c media fue de 7,47% en el periodo pre- y de 7,25% en el post-inclusión (diferencia pre-post=0,23; IC95%=-0,28 a 0,73). No hubo cambios en las LDL en los dos periodos (pre=79,4 mg/dL; post=79,7; diferencia pre-post= -0,25; IC95%=-13,6 a 13,1). Igualmente, no hubo diferencias en la presión arterial. La media de la presión sistólica fue de 129,5 en el periodo pre- y 131,6 en el periodo post-inclusión (diferencia pre-post=-2,1; IC95%= -7,0 a 2,7). La media de la presión diastólica fue de 70,3 para el periodo pre- y de 70,7 para el periodo post-inclusión (diferencia pre-post= -0,4; IC95%= -4,2 a 3,4). Conclusión: Los pacientes estaban generalmente satisfechos con la decisión de incluirse en el Madicare Part D. Los resultados clínicos no se afectaron por su participación en el plan Medicare Part D. Son necesarios más estudios para determinar el impacto a largo plazo de Medicare Part D en la diabetes (AU)

Pilot assessment of patient satisfaction and clinical impact of Medicare Part D in diabetic geriatric patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess patients' 1) satisfaction with their decision to enroll or not enroll in the Medicare Part D program, and 2) clinical status of diabetes before and after decision to enroll in Medicare Part D. METHODS: Patients 65 years or older were enrolled in the study from November 2006 through February 2007. Patients were screened by a clinical pharmacist at their clinician visit and administered a Medicare Part D satisfaction survey. Upon completion of the survey, a retrospective chart review was completed in diabetic patients who were enrolled in Medicare Part D to assess goal attainment of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and blood pressure. Pre-enrollment values were obtained in the 6 months prior to the start of Medicare Part D enrollment (July 1- December 31, 2005). Post- enrollment values were obtained after enrollment was complete for the 2006 year (May 1- October 31, 2006). RESULTS: Results show that 74% (60/81) of patients surveyed were enrolled into the Medicare Part D program, including patients who have dual eligibility. Of the 60 patients who were enrolled in Medicare Part D, 48 patients (80.0%) responded that they were satisfied with their decision to enroll. Clinical outcomes were unchanged from the pre-enrollment to the post-enrollment periods. Mean HbA1c was 7.47% in the pre-enrollment period and 7.25% post- enrollment (differencepre-post = 0.23; 95%CI = -0.28 to 0.73). There was no change in LDL in the two time periods (pre = 79.4 mg/dL; post = 79.7; differencepre-post = -0.25; 95%CI = -13.6 to 13.1). Similarly, there were no significant differences observed for blood pressure. Mean systolic blood pressure was 129.5 in the pre-enrollment period and 131.6 in the post-enrollment period (differencepre-post = -2.1; 95%CI = -7.0 to 2.7). Mean diastolic blood pressure was 70.3 for the pre- enrollment period and 70.7 for the post-enrollment period (differencepre-post = -0.4; 95%CI = -4.2 to 3.4). CONCLUSION: Patients were generally satisfied with their decision to enroll in Medicare Part D. Clinical outcomes were not affected by participation in a Medicare Part D plan. More longitudinal studies are necessary to determine long term impact of Medicare Part D on diabetes management.

Peripheral arterial disease: a review of disease awareness and management.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a progressive atherosclerotic condition affecting approximately 27 million people in North America and Europe. Albeit a common clinical malady, it is underrecognized and undertreated. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this article was to review the pathophysiology, clinical implications, diagnosis, and management of PAD. METHODS: Relevant published information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-2006). Search terms used included peripheral vascular diseases, intermittent claudication, arterial occlusive diseases, antiplatelet therapy, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, risk factors, smoking cessation, adrenergic beta-antagonists, and angiotensin-converting enzymes. RESULTS: PAD is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease as well as a reduction in quality of life. PAD symptoms are not always present with the disease; therefore, improvements in screening methods for at-risk patients are necessary. Patients at risk for PAD should be routinely screened, and appropriate management--including antiplatelet therapy and risk factor modifications--should be initiated once the disease is recognized. Risk factor modifications should include smoking cessation as well as blood pressure and cholesterol management. Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is the antiplatelet of choice, and clopidogrel should be used as an alternative if ASA therapy is contraindicated or an intolerance is present. Cilostazol has a minimal role for the symptomatic relief in patients with disabling intermittent claudication. All patients with PAD should be treated with a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor and potentially an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. Beta-Blockers should not be avoided unless documented worsening of symptoms is associated with their use. CONCLUSIONS: Patients at risk for PAD should be routinely screened, and appropriate management including antiplatelet therapy and risk factor modifications should be initiated once the disease is recognized.