Structured medication reviews in Parkinson's disease: pharmacists' views, experiences and needs - a qualitative study.

Background: Executing structured medication reviews (SMRs) in primary care to optimize drug treatment is considered standard care of community pharmacists in the Netherlands. Patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) often face complex drug regimens for their symptomatic treatment and might, therefore, benefit from an SMR. However, previously, no effect of an SMR on quality of life in PD was found. In trying to improve the case management of PD, it is interesting to understand if and to what extent SMRs in PD patients are of added value in the pharmacist's opinion and what are assumed facilitating and hindering factors. Objectives: To analyse the process of executing SMRs in PD patients from a community pharmacist's point of view. Design: A cross-sectional, qualitative study was performed, consisting of face-to-face semi-structured in-depth interviews. Methods: The interviews were conducted with community pharmacists who executed at least one SMR in PD, till data saturation was reached. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed thematically using an iterative approach. Results: Thirteen pharmacists were interviewed. SMRs in PD were considered of added value, especially regarding patient contact and bonding, individualized care and its possible effect in the future, although PD treatment is found already well monitored in secondary care. Major constraints were time, logistics and collaboration with medical specialists. Conclusion: Although community pharmacist-led SMRs are time-consuming and sometimes logistically challenging, they are of added value in primary care in general, and also in PD, of which treatment occurs mainly in secondary care. It emphasizes the pharmacist's role in PD treatment and might tackle future drug-related issues. Improvements concern multidisciplinary collaboration for optimized SMR execution and results.

Structured medication reviews in Parkinson's disease: pharmacists' views, experiences and needs Why is this research done? In Parkinson's disease (PD), drug therapy is still the most important treatment strategy. Due to disease progression, patients often face complicated medication regimens, polypharmacy, and potential drug-related problems. The execution of structured medication reviews (SMR) in primary care is considered standard care of community pharmacists in the Netherlands, aiming to optimise drug treatment. Although it might also affect clinical outcomes, we found no effect of an SMR in PD on quality of life in our previous study. In trying to improve case management of PD, we need to understand if and to what extent SMRs in PD patients are of added value in the pharmacist's opinion, and what are assumed facilitating and hindering factors. What did the researchers do? We conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 community pharmacists who recently executed ⩾1 SMR in PD. What did the researchers find? We found that SMRs in PD are considered of added value with regard to patient bonding and individualised care. By being known by the pharmacist, and vice versa, by knowing the patient's situation, future drug problems might be tackled earlier. However, executing SMRs comes with barriers, of which lack of time, logistic constraints and difficulties in cooperation with the medical specialist are the most important. What do these findings mean? Taking into account both the pharmacist's effort and additional costs when performing an SMR in the current setting, the valuable time of a pharmacist could potentially better be spent on more (cost-)effective interventions, or a structural solution should be sought for the experienced hindering factors. Since we do not doubt the importance of periodic medication optimization in complex diseases or high-risk patients, we have to focus on either improving the current setting of SMRs in PD, or searching for other strategies in which this can be achieved.

The Effect of a Structured Medication Review on Quality of Life in Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Drug therapy is important for controlling symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, it often results in complex medication regimens and could easily lead to drug related problems (DRP), suboptimal adherence and reduced treatment efficacy. A structured medication review (SMR) could address these issues and optimize therapy, although little is known about clinical effects in PD patients. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether an SMR improves quality of life (QoL) in PD. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, half of the 202 PD patients with polypharmacy received a community pharmacist-led SMR. The control group received usual care. Assessments at baseline, and after three and six months comprised six validated questionnaires. Primary outcome was PD specific QoL [(PDQ-39; range 0 (best QoL) - 100 (worst QoL)]. Secondary outcomes were disability score, non-motor symptoms, general health status, and personal care giver's QoL. Furthermore, DRPs, proposed interventions, and implemented modifications in medication schedules were analyzed. RESULTS: No improvement in QoL was seen six months after an SMR, with a non-significant treatment effect difference of 2.09 (-0.63;4.80) in favor of the control group. No differences were found in secondary outcomes. In total, 260 potential DRPs were identified (2.6 (±1.8) per patient), of which 62% led to drug therapy optimization. CONCLUSION: In the current setting, a community pharmacist-led SMR did not improve QoL in PD patients, nor improved other pre-specified outcomes.

The Impact of Non-dopaminergic Medication on Quality of Life in Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Quality of life (QoL) in Parkinson's disease (PD) depends on multiple factors. Due to PD treatment and accompanying, age-related or independent comorbidities, pill burden is often high. The relation of QoL and pharmacotherapy for comorbidities in PD has not been widely studied. This study investigated if and to what extent non-dopaminergic drugs are related to QoL in PD. Second, the impact of demographics and non-motor symptoms were evaluated. A better understanding of the impact of different non-dopaminergic drugs and polypharmacy on QoL will have added value in selecting appropriate (medication) interventions. METHODS: In a cross-sectional analysis, medication prescription data of 209 PD patients were analyzed and grouped according to the Rx-Risk comorbidity index. QoL was measured using the PDQ-39 questionnaire. Non-motor symptoms were analyzed with the Non-Motor Symptoms questionnaire. Independent factors associated with a reduced QoL were identified with a multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Non-dopaminergic drugs, subdivided into Rx-Risk comorbidity categories, were not associated with reduced QoL, except for the use of anti-epileptic drugs. However, using more daily non-dopaminergic drugs was also negatively associated with QoL, as well as female sex, increased PD severity, and more non-motor symptoms. Contraindicated non-dopaminergic medication was barely prescribed (0.4%). CONCLUSION: Non-dopaminergic drugs are frequently prescribed, and higher numbers are associated with impaired QoL in PD. However, when divided in drug types, only anti-epileptic drugs were negatively associated with QoL. In these patients, physicians might improve QoL by further optimizing the condition it was prescribed for (e.g., pain or anxiety), or managing of side effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register; NL4360.