Chronic rhinosinusitis: a qualitative study of patient views and experiences of current management in primary and secondary care.

OBJECTIVES: To explore patient views and perspectives of current management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) in primary and secondary care. DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative telephone interviews as part of the MACRO programme (Defining best Management for Adults with Chronic RhinOsinusitis). SETTING: Primary care and secondary care ear, nose and throat outpatient clinics in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five patients consented to in-depth telephone interviews. Transcribed recordings were managed using NVivo software and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: CRS has a significant impact on patients' quality of life, affecting their ability to work effectively, their social interactions and daily living. Patients seek help when symptoms become unmanageable, but can become frustrated with the primary care system with difficulties obtaining an appointment, and lack of continuity of care. Patients perceive that general practitioners can be dismissive of CRS symptoms, and patients often prioritise other concerns when they consult. Health system barriers and poor communication can result in delays in accessing appropriate treatment and referral. Adherence to intranasal steroids is a problem and patients are uncertain about correct technique. Nasal irrigation can be time-consuming and difficult for patients to use. Secondary care consultations can appear rushed, and patients would like specialists to take a more 'holistic' approach to their management. Surgery is often considered a temporary solution, appropriate when medical options have been explored. CONCLUSIONS: Patients are frustrated with the management of their CRS, and poor communication can result in delays in receiving appropriate treatment and timely referral. Patients seek better understanding of their condition and guidance to support treatments decisions in light of uncertainties around the different medical and surgical options. Better coordinated care between general practice and specialist settings and consistency of advice has the potential to increase patient satisfaction and improve outcomes.

'Like doing a jigsaw with half the parts missing': community pharmacists and the management of cancer pain in the community.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to explore and describe community pharmacists' current and potential place in the cancer pain pathway. Objectives were to describe pharmacists' role in advising patients and their carers on optimum use of opioid drugs for pain relief, identify elements of medicines management that could be modified and identify opportunities for improved communication with patients and other professionals. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 25 community pharmacists in three areas of England. Data were analysed using the Framework method. KEY FINDINGS: Pharmacists had no reliable method to identify patients with cancer and no access to disease stage and treatment plan information. There was little evidence of any routine communication with other professionals about patient care. Contact with patients was limited. Access to palliative care medicines could be problematic for patients and medicines use reviews (MURs) were rarely done. Interview data suggested variable levels of knowledge about optimal opioid use in cancer pain or awareness of patients' priorities. For some pharmacists, proactive involvement appeared to be inhibited by fear of discussing emotional and wider social aspects and accounts showed that a wide range of issues and concerns were raised by family members, indicating considerable unmet need. Pharmacists tended to assume information had already been provided by others and felt isolated from other care team members. Many felt that their potential contribution to cancer pain management was constrained but aspired to do more. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant scope for improving access to and interaction with, community pharmacists by people with cancer pain and their families. Finding ways to embed pharmacists within palliative care teams could provide a starting point for a greater contribution to cancer pain management.

The influence of formulation and medicine delivery system on medication administration errors in care homes for older people.

INTRODUCTION: Older people in care homes are at increased risk of medication errors and adverse drug events. The effect of formulation on administration errors is not known, that is whether the medicine is a tablet or capsule, liquid or device such as an inhaler. Also, the impact on administration errors of monitored dosage systems (MDS), commonly used in UK care homes to dispense tablets and capsules, is not known. This study investigated the influence of formulation and MDS on administration errors. METHODS: Administration errors were identified by pharmacists (using validated definitions) observing two drug rounds of residents randomly selected from a purposive sample of UK nursing and residential homes. Errors were classified and analysed by formulation and medicine delivery system. RESULTS: The odds of administration errors by formulation, when compared with tablets and capsules in MDS, were: liquids 4.31 (95% CI 2.02 to 9.21; p = 0.0002); topicals/transdermals/injections 19.61 (95% CI 6.90 to 55.73; p < 0.0001); inhalers 33.58 (95% CI 12.51 to 90.19; p < 0.0001). The odds of administration errors for tablets and capsules not in MDS were double those that were dispensed in MDS (adjusted OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.02 to 4.51; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Inhalers and liquid medicines were associated with significantly increased odds of administration errors. Training of staff in safe administration of these formulations needs implementing. Although there was some evidence that MDS reduced the odds of an administration error, the use of MDS impacts on other aspects of medicines management. Because of this, and as the primary topic of our study was not MDS, a prospective trial specifically designed to evaluate the overall impact of MDS on medicine management in care homes is needed.

Learning lessons from electronic prescribing implementations in secondary care.

This paper reports a study undertaken in the UK to gather lessons learned from hospital sites that have implemented electronic prescribing systems. The work was commissioned by NHS Connecting for Health, the UK Department of Health agency responsible for the implementation of the National Programme for Information Technology. The aim was to capture front-line experience of the project and systems implementation, and to share it with staff who will in the future participate in other implementations. Data were drawn from detailed interviews with staff and a survey in 13 hospitals in England, as well as a review of published studies of implementations. The study output is a report and six user-facing briefing documents targeted at key stakeholder groups; nurses, pharmacist, doctors, senior executives, implementation team members and IM&T staff.

Medication errors with electronic prescribing (eP): Two views of the same picture.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative prospective methods are widely used to evaluate the impact of new technologies such as electronic prescribing (eP) on medication errors. However, they are labour-intensive and it is not always feasible to obtain pre-intervention data. Our objective was to compare the eP medication error picture obtained with retrospective quantitative and qualitative methods. METHODS: The study was carried out at one English district general hospital approximately two years after implementation of an integrated electronic prescribing, administration and records system. QUANTITATIVE: A structured retrospective analysis was carried out of clinical records and medication orders for 75 randomly selected patients admitted to three wards (medicine, surgery and paediatrics) six months after eP implementation. QUALITATIVE: Eight doctors, 6 nurses, 8 pharmacy staff and 4 other staff at senior, middle and junior grades, and 19 adult patients on acute surgical and medical wards were interviewed. Staff interviews explored experiences of developing and working with the system; patient interviews focused on experiences of medicine prescribing and administration on the ward. Interview transcripts were searched systematically for accounts of medication incidents. A classification scheme was developed and applied to the errors identified in the records review. RESULTS: The two approaches produced similar pictures of the drug use process. Interviews identified types of error identified in the retrospective notes review plus two eP-specific errors which were not detected by record review. Interview data took less time to collect than record review, and provided rich data on the prescribing process, and reasons for delays or non-administration of medicines, including "once only" orders and "as required" medicines. CONCLUSIONS: The qualitative approach provided more understanding of processes, and some insights into why medication errors can happen. The method is cost-effective and could be used to supplement information from anonymous error reporting schemes.

Diclofenac for acute pain in children.

BACKGROUND: Diclofenac is commonly used for acute pain in children, but is not licensed for this indication in all age groups. OBJECTIVES: 1) Assess the efficacy of diclofenac for acute pain in children. 2) Assess the safety of diclofenac for short-term use in children. 3) Identify gaps in the evidence to direct future research. SEARCH STRATEGY: Seventeen databases indexing clinical trial reports were searched in February 2005 (with an update search as part of this first review in May 2008). A hand search of Paediatric Anaesthesia was undertaken and summaries obtained of adverse reaction reports from the UK Yellow Card Scheme and World Health Organization (WHO) Monitoring Centre. The reference lists of included studies were also searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any published report, in any language, involving the administration of diclofenac to a patient aged 18 years or younger for acute pain and detailing either monitoring of efficacy or safety. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted the data. Authors were contacted where necessary. Review Manager version 5 was used for analysis. MAIN RESULTS: 1) EFFICACY: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing diclofenac with placebo/any other treatment by using pain scores (assessed or reported), or need for rescue analgesia.2) SAFETY: any type of study seeking adverse events (regardless of cause). An adverse event was defined as any reported adverse or untoward happening to a patient being treated with diclofenac for acute pain.Seven publications on diclofenac efficacy and 79 on safety (74 studies plus five case reports) were included in the final analysis. Compared with placebo/no treatment, diclofenac significantly reduced need for post-operative rescue analgesia (relative risk [RR] 0.6; number needed to treat to benefit [NNT] 3.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5 to 6.3).Compared with any other non-NSAID, patients receiving diclofenac suffered less nausea or vomiting, or both (RR 0.6; NNT 7.7 [5.3 to 14.3]). There appeared to be no increase in bleeding requiring surgical intervention in patients receiving diclofenac in the peri-operative period. Serious diclofenac adverse reactions occurred in fewer than 0.24% of children treated for acute pain. The types of serious adverse reactions were similar to those reported in adults. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Diclofenac is an effective analgesic for perioperative acute pain in children. It causes similar types of serious adverse reactions in children as in adults, but these are rare. More research on optimum dosing and safety in asthmatic children is required.

Prospective observational study of adverse drug reactions to diclofenac in children.

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the type of common (occurring in >1% of patients) adverse reactions caused by diclofenac when given to children for acute pain. METHODS: A prospective observational study was undertaken on paediatric surgical patents aged < or =12 years at Great Ormond Street and University College London Hospitals. All adverse events were recorded, and causality assessment used to judge the likelihood of them being due to diclofenac. Prospective recruitment meant not all patients were prescribed diclofenac, allowing an analysis of utilization. Causality of all serious adverse events was reviewed by an expert panel. RESULTS: Children prescribed diclofenac were significantly older, and stayed in hospital for shorter periods than those who were not. Diclofenac was not avoided in asthmatic patients. Data on 380 children showed they suffer similar types of nonserious adverse reactions to adults. The incidence (95% confidence interval) of rash was 0.8% (0.016, 2.3); minor central nervous system disturbance 0.5% (0.06, 1.9); rectal irritation with suppositories 0.3% (0.009, 1.9); and diarrhoea 0.3% (0.007, 1.5). No serious adverse event was judged to be caused by diclofenac, meaning the incidence of serious adverse reactions to diclofenac in children is <0.8%. CONCLUSION: Children given diclofenac for acute pain appeared to suffer similar types of adverse reactions to adults; the incidence of serious adverse reaction is <0.8%.

Methodological variability in detecting prescribing errors and consequences for the evaluation of interventions.

PURPOSE: To compare four methods of detecting prescribing errors (PE) in the same patient cohorts before and after an intervention (computerised physician order entry; CPOE) and to determine whether the impact of CPOE is identified consistently by all methods. METHODS: PEs were identified using (1) prospective detection by ward pharmacist; (2) retrospective health record review; (3) retrospective use of a trigger tool and (4) spontaneous reporting over two separate 4-week periods on one surgical ward in a UK teaching hospital. RESULTS: We reviewed 93 patients pre- and 114 post-CPOE. Using all four methods, we identified 135 PE (10.7% of all medication orders) pre-CPOE, and 127 (7.9%) post-CPOE. There was little overlap in PE detected by the different methods: prospective detection identified 48 (36% of all PE) pre- and 30 (24%) post-CPOE; retrospective review (RR) revealed 93 (69%) pre- and 105 (83%) post-CPOE, trigger tool 0 pre- and 2 (2%) post-CPOE and spontaneous reporting 1 (1%) pre- and 1 (1%) post-CPOE. The calculated relative reduction in risk of PE was 50% using prospective data, 12% with RR and 26% using data from all four methods. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, each method predominantly identified different PE. A combination of methods may be required to understand the true effectiveness of different interventions.

Population pharmacokinetics of oral diclofenac for acute pain in children.

AIMS: To develop a population pharmacokinetic model for a new diclofenac suspension (50 mg 5 ml(-1)) in adult volunteers and paediatric patients, and recommend a dose for acute pain in children. METHODS: Blood samples were drawn at the start and end of surgery, and on removal of the venous cannula from 70 children (aged 1 to 12 years, weight 9 to 37 kg) who received a preoperative oral 1 mg kg(-1) dose; these were pooled with rich (14 post-dose samples) data from 30 adult volunteers. Population pharmacokinetic modelling was undertaken with NONMEM. The optimum adult dose of diclofenac for acute pain is 50 mg. Simulation from the final model was performed to predict a paediatric dose to achieve a similar AUC to 50 mg in adults. RESULTS: A total of 558 serum diclofenac concentrations from 100 subjects was used in the pooled analysis. A single disposition compartment model with first order elimination and dual absorption compartments was used. The estimates of CL/F and V(D)/F were 53.98 l h(-1) 70 kg(-1) and 4.84 l 70 kg(-1) respectively. Allometric size models appeared to predict adequately changes in CL and V(D) with age. Of the simulated doses investigated, 1 mg kg(-1) gave paediatric AUC((0,12 h)) to adult 50 mg AUC((0,12 h)) ratios of 1.00, 1.08 and 1.18 for ages 1-3, 4-6 and 7-12 years respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown 1 mg kg(-1) diclofenac to produce similar exposure in children aged 1 to 12 years as 50 mg in adults, and is acceptable for clinical practice; patients are unlikely to obtain further benefit from higher doses.

Inhaler technique in Turkish people with poor English: a case of information discrimination?

OBJECTIVES: (a) To compare metered dose inhaler (MDI) technique in users with poor English and fluent English, (b) to evaluate two interventions: a translated patient information leaflet (PIL) plus support from an translator (PIL + verbal) and a multimedia touch screen system (MTS) using video clips and own-language instruction. METHODS: (a) Inhaler technique was videotaped and key steps rated blind for 105 fluent English-speakers (FE) and 69 Turkish-speakers with poor English (EP). (b) The EP group was randomised to receive information by MTS (n = 34) or PIL + verbal (n = 35). Inhaler technique was videotaped before and after information. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (a) Global inhaler technique; (b) breathing-in time; (c) co-ordination of inspiration and inhaler actuation. RESULTS: Global technique, co-ordination and breath-holding were all significantly worse in MDI users with poor English. Only 17% of that group had adequate technique compared to over half (62%) of FE. The EP group were significantly less likely than the FE group to report ever seeing the practice nurse about their asthma. After information, global technique was rated as improved in 50% of the MTS group compared to 28% of those given a translated PIL. A further six people (17%) in the PIL group improved after subsequent verbal advice in their own language. Both information methods significantly increased inhaler shaking and mouthpiece checking, but co-ordination only improved in a small number of people. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that Turkish-speaking MDI users with poor English may be disadvantaged in terms of access to medicines information in the UK. The acceptability of pharmacy-based support services for this, and other specific language groups should be explored. Multimedia offers an alternative to a translator for brief explanations, particularly for first-time users, but improving poor co-ordination requires individualised "hands on" teaching from health professionals.

A qualitative study of pharmacists' perspectives on the supply of emergency hormonal contraception via patient group direction in the UK.

AIM: To investigate pharmacists' views and experiences of supplying emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) via a group prescribing protocol in community pharmacies in the UK. DESIGN: Qualitative study using depth interviews. SETTING: Community pharmacists in Manchester, Salford and Trafford (Greater Manchester), and Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham (London) Health Action Zones in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-four community pharmacists supplying EHC in Manchester, Salford and Trafford, and Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham (London). RESULTS: Pharmacists were broadly very positive about their experiences supplying EHC via the group prescribing protocol. Pharmacists identified many benefits of the EHC schemes for clients, in particular, improved access to EHC at no cost to clients. The confidential nature of the scheme was also seen as an advantage as was the scope for referral to other service providers. Pharmacists also believed that the scheme had benefits for the profession in terms of enhanced professional standing. However, their concerns included the extent of repeated use of EHC, the possible impact on contraceptive behaviors and sexually transmitted infections and its impact on male coercive sexual behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Although pharmacy supply of EHC may improve access for some clients and is perceived as a popular service, research into the implications of the schemes as identified in this study need to be conducted.

We are the experts: people with asthma talk about their medicine information needs.

People with chronic illness are being encouraged to become more involved in their care. For this, they need to be well informed about their medicines, and more written medicines information is becoming available. However, there is little data about its effectiveness and impact. This study examined the patient perspective of medicines information through focus groups of people with asthma. Most participants actively sought medicines information from a variety of professional and lay sources. There were some positive experiences but many examples of partial or total information failure. Individualised information was valued and medicine leaflets were generally seen as less helpful than face-to-face advice. Some felt strongly that patients with long experience should be involved in the development of medicine information leaflets. We conclude that medicine information leaflets do not currently meet the needs of users and that people who take medicines should be involved in their development and testing.

Providing information on metered dose inhaler technique: is multimedia as effective as print?

BACKGROUND: Metered dose inhalers (MDIs) are not easy to use well. Every MDI user receives a manufacturer's patient information leaflet (PIL). However, not everyone is able or willing to read written information. Multimedia offers an alternative method for teaching or reinforcing correct inhaler technique. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of brief exposure to the same key information, given by PIL and multimedia touchscreen computer (MTS). METHODS: A single-blind randomized trial was conducted in 105 fluent English speakers (53% female; 93% White) aged 12-87 years in London general practices. All patients had had at least one repeat prescription for a bronchodilator MDI in the last 6 months. Inhaler technique was videotaped before and after viewing information from a PIL (n = 48) or MTS (n = 57). Key steps were rated blind using a checklist and videotape timings. The main outcome measures were a change in (i) global technique; (ii) co-ordination of inspiration and inhaler actuation; (iii) breathing-in time; and (iv) information acceptability. RESULTS: Initially, over a third of both groups had poor technique. After information, 44% (MTS) and 19% (PIL) were rated as improved. Co-ordination improved significantly after viewing information via MTS, but not after PIL. Breathing-in time increased significantly in both groups. Half the subjects said they had learned 'something new'. The MTS group were more likely to mention co-ordination and breathing. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term, multimedia is as least as effective as a good leaflet, and may have advantages for steps involving movement. MTS was acceptable to all age groups. The method could be used more widely in primary care.

Training and supporting pharmacists to supply progestogen-only emergency contraception.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and evaluate the training and support provided to the first cohort of community pharmacists to supply progestogen-only emergency contraception (POEC) under a Patient Group Direction (PGD) in Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham, London. DESIGN: The study comprised (a) a systematic analysis of written and oral data from pharmacists before and during training, and at 5 and 13-14 months after launch; (b) analysis of telephone calls to clinical support and (c) analysis of written pharmacy records. SUBJECTS: A total of 20/22 pharmacists in the first training cohort; 6/23 pharmacists who applied but were not accepted were also followed up. RESULTS: A formal course with role-play was a successful training method, and the course also served as a team-building exercise. Subsequent interviews demonstrated that pharmacists had understood the concept of client confidentiality and gained confidence over time in the use of the PGD. The on-call consultants received 152 calls in the first 12 months of the scheme. Over 80% of the calls concerned clinical criteria (notably including 22% that were queries about oral contraceptives). Frequency ranged from one to eight calls per week with 28% made at weekends. In over half (60%) of the calls the pharmacist was subsequently able to make a supply. Queries over client management resulted in several changes in the protocol. The primary expressed concern for all pharmacists at all time points was how clients might 'misuse' or 'abuse' the service, and this remained a concern despite the fact that it also applies to other routes of supply of POEC. However, the PGD cohort was more positive on local benefits than pharmacists who were not selected. CONCLUSIONS: Training and support have enabled this often-underused group of professionals to participate in an extended reproductive health service. Mobile phones are an essential support tool.