Implementation of medication reviews in community pharmacy: reaching consensus on stakeholders' recommendations for mechanisms of change using the nominal group technique.

BACKGROUND: Since 2022, patients with five or more medicines are eligible for a medication review (MR) in a community pharmacy remunerated by the German health system. However, implementation has been slow, with few pharmacies providing MRs. Stakeholders' input is necessary to detail how implementation strategies can be executed effectively on a national level. Prior research identified "external facilitation" and "altering incentives" as crucial strategies to achieve implementation outcomes. AIM: To gather stakeholders' recommendations for, and obtain consensus on, mechanisms of change that allow implementation strategies to work in practice. METHOD: The consensus method used was the nominal group technique (NGT) with NGT-discussions held separately with pharmacy owners and pharmacy chambers employees. Votes were summed and the relative importance (rI) calculated, defined as (score achieved for a mechanism)/(maximum possible score) × 100. Content analysis provided context for the highest ranked mechanisms and allowed linking to implementation outcomes. RESULTS: Four NGT-discussions were held in 2023 (n = 2 owners; n = 2 chamber employees) with a total of 17 participants. The overall highest ranked mechanisms were fit-for-purpose software (rI = 154.7) detailed process support (rI = 104.9) and an expert support line (rI = 77.7). These together with financial viability (rI = 40.0) were prioritised by both participant groups. Three mechanisms were favoured for both implementation strategies, namely software, process support and materials (rI = 34.3). CONCLUSION: This study identified stakeholders' priorities for mechanisms of change to implement MRs in community pharmacies. Focusing efforts on the prioritised mechanisms is likely to significantly advance a national implementation plan for countries which are at an early implementation stage.

Writing a manuscript for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal: Guidance from the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy.

Publishing in reputable peer-reviewed journals is an integral step of the clinical pharmacy research process, allowing for knowledge transfer and advancement in clinical pharmacy practice. Writing a manuscript for publication in a journal requires several careful considerations to ensure that research findings are communicated to the satisfaction of editors and reviewers, and effectively to the readers. This commentary provides a summary of the main points to consider, outlining how to: (1) select a suitable journal, (2) tailor the manuscript for the journal readership, (3) organise the content of the manuscript in line with the journal's guidelines, and (4) manage feedback from the peer review process. This commentary reviews the steps of the writing process, identifies common pitfalls, and proposes ways to overcome them. It aims to assist both novice and established researchers in the field of clinical pharmacy to enhance the quality of writing in a research paper to maximise impact.

Scope, content and quality of clinical pharmacy practice guidelines: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for pharmacy practitioners regarding various clinical pharmacy activities have been published in a number of countries. There is a need to review the guidelines and identify the scope of activities covered as a prelude to developing internationally acceptable common guidelines. AIM: To review the scope of clinical pharmacy guidelines and assess the extent to which these guidelines conform to quality standards as per the AGREE II instrument. METHOD: Medline, Embase, Guideline Central, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Google Scholar and Google (for grey literature) were searched for the period 2010 to January 2023. Guidelines which focused on any health care setting and any clinical pharmacy activity were included. Data were extracted and quality assessed independently by two reviewers using the English version of the AGREE II instrument. RESULTS: Thirty-eight guidelines were included, mostly originating from Australia (n = 10), Ireland (n = 8), UK (n = 7) and USA (n = 5). Areas covered included medication reconciliation, medicines optimisation, medication management and transition of care. As per the AGREE II assessment, the highest score was obtained for the scope and purpose domain and the lowest score for rigour of development, mainly due to non-consideration of literature/evidence to inform guideline development. CONCLUSION: Clinical pharmacy guidelines development processes need to focus on all quality domains and should take a systematic approach to guideline development. Guidelines need to further emphasise person-centred care and clinical communication. There is a scope to harmonise the guidelines internationally considering the diverse practices, standards and legislations across different geographies.

How to write a successful grant application: guidance provided by the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy.

Considering a rejection rate of 80-90%, the preparation of a research grant is often considered a daunting task since it is resource intensive and there is no guarantee of success, even for seasoned researchers. This commentary provides a summary of the key points a researcher needs to consider when writing a research grant proposal, outlining: (1) how to conceptualise the research idea; (2) how to find the right funding call; (3) the importance of planning; (4) how to write; (5) what to write, and (6) key questions for reflection during preparation. It attempts to explain the difficulties associated with finding calls in clinical pharmacy and advanced pharmacy practice, and how to overcome them. The commentary aims to assist all pharmacy practice and health services research colleagues new to the grant application process, as well as experienced researchers striving to improve their grant review scores. The guidance in this paper is part of ESCP's commitment to stimulate "innovative and high-quality research in all areas of clinical pharmacy".

Just a 'romantic idea'? A theory-based interview study on medication review implementation with pharmacy owners.

BACKGROUND: Recent legal changes in Germany entitle patients on multiple medications to receive a medication review (MR). However, the provision of MRs is not mandatory and pharmacy owners decide whether to implement this service in their pharmacies. AIM: To determine pharmacy owners' attitudes towards MRs, explore their experiences with MR implementation and examine their perceptions of barriers and facilitators towards implementation of MRs in community pharmacies. METHOD: Pharmacy owners were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Purposive sampling was used with selection criteria being MR-implementation stage, and geographical location of the pharmacy. The topic guide was based on a systematic review and the Framework for Implementation of Services in Pharmacy (FISpH). Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded directly against the FISpH. RESULTS: Twenty-one pharmacy owners were interviewed. Despite participants' consistent positive attitude towards MRs, most believed that providing MRs on an economically viable basis would be challenging. Several practical suggestions emerged which would enable community pharmacies a smoother implementation of MRs. Suggestions included employing 'change facilitators', who visit and support implementing pharmacies; national awareness campaigns targeting patients and health professionals; reducing bureaucracy; continuing professional development; involving technicians in some MR-tasks; and offering an additional incentive to lower the initial implementation threshold. CONCLUSION: This research identified numerous factors that are likely to increase owners' and managers' support to the idea of MRs. This may be of interest to any country planning implementation of MRs.

"It is the future. Clinical pharmaceutical care simply has to be a matter of course." - Community pharmacy clinical service providers' and service developers' views on complex implementation factors.

BACKGROUND: While there is a lot of documented evidence about the clinical and cost effectiveness of pharmacists' role extensions there is an inherent gap between service development and implementation. OBJECTIVE(S): This study aims to better understand the complex factors that influence the implementation of clinical pharmacy services from both the perspective of the community pharmacy service providers and service developers. METHODS: A prospective qualitative interview study using purposive sampling of twelve service developers and twelve community pharmacy service providers from across all nine Federal States of Austria. The validated and piloted interview guide contained questions and prompts on role perceptions, attitudes, experience, implementation barriers, training needs and measures identified to strengthen clinical pharmacy provision in community pharmacy. Verbatim quotes were independently mapped to the Framework for the Implementation of Services in Pharmacy (FISpH) by two researchers. RESULTS: 24 Interviews were carried out. Data saturation was achieved. There is a great deal of enthusiasm to develop the remit of clinical pharmacy services. It is seen as important to ensure the future survival of the profession. Service developers are more positive and confident in the implementation success and pharmacists' skills than providers. Clear mandates for politics, academia and individual pharmacists have been discussed to affect change. CONCLUSIONS: Austrian pharmacists are facing the same well documented challenges as many other healthcare systems only with more urgency. The development of a clinical pharmacy service framework; education accreditation standard and a well-supported continuous professional development system are considered key to bring about the necessary culture shift.

The standards of practice for delivery of polypharmacy and chronic disease medication reviews by general practice clinical pharmacists: a consensus study.

Background General practice in the UK is experiencing a crisis. Greater multidisciplinary working is a potential solution. The new general practice contract in Scotland encourages this and includes a new pharmacotherapy service to be delivered by General Practice Clinical Pharmacists (GPCPs). Consensus is lacking for the standards of practice for delivery of pharmacotherapy medication reviews (which are polypharmacy and chronic medication reviews) as part of this service. Aim To identify and validate standards of practice for polypharmacy and chronic disease medication (pharmacotherapy level 3) reviews conducted by GPCPs. Method A two-phased mixed-methods consensus methodology was used. Phase 1: An expert group of GPCPs (n = 4) and clinical pharmacist managers (n = 2) responsible for delivering the pharmacotherapy service used a Modified Nominal Group Technique to generate potential standards. Phase 2: Two-round Delphi survey involving GPCPs with ≥ 1 year of experience of working in general practice (n = 159). Results The expert group identified 44 potential standards of practice for polypharmacy and chronic disease reviews. Practicing GPCPs indicated during the Delphi phase that the 44 standards were applicable to practice. The standards of practice covered seven main categories: skills, environment, qualifications, qualities and behaviours, knowledge, process and experience. Conclusion Practicing GPCPs indicated that the standards identified by the expert group are acceptable and valid for current practice and the delivery of polypharmacy and chronic medication reviews. The application of these standards to practice may help GPCPs and general practices to ensure equitable delivery of patient care.

Experiences of key stakeholders with the implementation of medication reviews in community pharmacies: A systematic review using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

BACKGROUND: Though medication reviews have shown positive patient outcomes, they are still not widely implemented in community pharmacies. Published reviews on their implementation often include several other pharmacy services, making them non-specific. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to focus solely on the experiences of different stakeholders with the implementation of medication reviews will help to better understand relevant facilitators and barriers. OBJECTIVES: To critically appraise, synthesise and present the available evidence on experiences of key stakeholders with the implementation of medication reviews and to identify barriers and facilitators to its implementation in community pharmacies. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in four databases for studies published in English, Spanish or German. Key search terms included: implementation, pharmac*, medication review, facilitator, barrier. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Findings were mapped directly against the constructs of the CFIR. RESULTS: Out of 924 retrieved records 24 articles from 9 countries met the inclusion criteria. Key facilitators identified included pharmacists' openness to practice change and a high degree of patient satisfaction post medication review. Attracting patients to the service was stated as challenging due to an unawareness of the scope and potential benefit of a medication review. The dominant barrier was inadequate remuneration, as it impacted all additional resourcing and ultimately the viability of the service. Further barriers included difficult professional relationships with doctors and little mandate from health authorities. Most reports were from the employed pharmacists' perspective and concerned the inner setting, other perspectives were under-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this systematic review illustrate different stakeholders' experiences and add to the understanding of challenges in the implementation process. Nevertheless, findings also highlight how scarce reporting of external stakeholders' views is and that filling this gap can unveil hidden barriers and facilitators. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO register (CRD 42019122836).

Patients' lived experiences with antineoplastic medicines for the management of malignant solid tumours: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Antineoplastic medicines affect the patients' physical and psychosocial well-being posing challenges for patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals. However, little is known about the patients' lived experience with medicines (PLEM) for antineoplastic treatment. It is the lived experience that gives meaning to each individual's perception of a particular phenomenon which is influenced by internal and external factors relevant to the individual. OBJECTIVES: To critically appraise, synthesise and present the available evidence of patients' lived experience with antineoplastic medicines prescribed for the management of malignant solid tumours. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in six electronic databases for articles published in English with no date restrictions. The search terms were related to beliefs, practice and burden in relation to patient, antineoplastic medicines, tumours and lived experience. Study selection, quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Research findings were analysed using narrative and meta-synthesis approaches. RESULTS: The search retrieved 31,004 articles with only 10 studies satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies were published between 2005 and 2016 in Europe (n = 6), America (n = 3) and Asia (n = 1). Nine themes were identified to contribute to the patients' lived experience with antineoplastic medicines. These were (a) influence from family members, healthcare professionals, media and culture, (b) general attitude towards medicine, (c) accepting medicine, (d) modifying or altering medicine regimen or dose, (e) medicine characteristics, (f) medicine routine, (g) medicine adverse events, (h) medicine and social burden and (i) healthcare associated medicine burden. Patients tend to undergo a continuous process of reinterpretations of their experience with medicines throughout their treatment journey. CONCLUSION: The use of antineoplastic medicines has a profound effect on the patients' lives. Further longitudinal in-depth studies are required to provide deeper insight into PLEM and support patients in their treatment journey.

Renal and Bone Adverse Effects of a Tenofovir-Based Regimen in the Treatment of HIV-Infected Children: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF)-containing regimens in the treatment of HIV-infected children have safety concerns with respect to renal and bone toxicity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review and critically appraise the literature relating to the reported renal and bone adverse effects of TDF-based regimens in the treatment of HIV-infected children from 2 to 19 years old. METHODS: Searches were performed using the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE, OvidSP, ScienceDirect and Web of Science databases and platforms. All primary studies involving tenofovir use in HIV-infected children were sought. Studies that involved the use of TDF for pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis, and treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection were excluded. Data on study characteristics, participant's characteristics, therapeutic intervention and adverse effects were extracted using a piloted tool. In addition, pharmacovigilance data from the WHO Adverse Reaction database were included. RESULTS: We identified 19 studies that reported the presence of renal and bone adverse effects of TDF and these included a total of 1100 study participants. The reports were in distinctly heterogeneous participant groups. A total of 287 renal and bone adverse effects were reported (250 renal and 37 bone adverse effects). Approximately 238 (21.6 %) participants were affected by these adverse effects. Of these, 15 participants stopped their TDF-containing regimen due to these adverse effects. In addition, the pharmacovigilance data from the WHO Adverse Reaction database reported 101 renal and bone adverse effects for patients whose indication was HIV/AIDS. CONCLUSION: This systematic review summarises the reports of renal and bone adverse effects of a TDF-containing regimen in the treatment of HIV-infected children. Our findings suggest that the benefits of using TDF in children need to be balanced against the potential risk of toxicity.

Interprofessional student-run primary health care clinics: Implications for pharmacy education in Scotland.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional student-run primary health care clinics have been a flagship model of health professional education in Canada for many years. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is support for implementing this educational model in the United Kingdom and to highlight the implications for pharmacy education in Scotland. METHOD: A cross-sectional postal survey of 3000 randomly selected citizens of Aberdeen city and shire, Scotland, aged 18 years and older. RESULTS: Of the 824 questionnaires that were returned (response rate 27.5%), more than half of the respondents (62.4%; n = 514) would consider accessing health care from a student-led, walk-in service. The range of services they expect to see includes general health checks (60%; n = 494), help for sexually transmitted diseases (57.5%; n = 474), weight management (56.8%; n = 468), smoking cessation (54.4%; n = 448) and drug misuse services (47.2%; n = 387). Concerns raised pertained to student ability, suitability for children and accessibility. Many comments pertained to the improvement of the current system by offering after-hours care. DISCUSSION: The positive response from the general public towards an interprofessional student-run primary health care clinic in Aberdeen suggests that this Canadian model of interdisciplinary health professional education would likely be a successful addition to the pharmacy curriculum in Scotland.