Medicines management services provided by community pharmacists have been proposed as one means to ensure that patients receive all the medicines they may benefit from in the English National Health Service. These services may also offer ways of addressing the historic under-utilization of community pharmacists' clinical skills and expertise. Medicines management services differ significantly from the dispensing and medicines sales roles traditionally associated with community pharmacy, particularly in relation to the provision for pharmacists to make recommendations to both patients and doctors about pharmacological treatment and lifestyle management. This paper describes patients' experiences of a medicines management service provided by community pharmacists for people with coronary heart disease, delivered in England. It draws on findings from semistructured, face-to-face interviews with 49 patients recruited from pilot sites delivering the service. Findings suggest that although patients cautiously welcomed the opportunity to consult with a pharmacist about their medicines, they had reservations about them making recommendations about treatment, and many still regarded the doctor as the health professional 'in charge' of their medicines. The implications of these findings are discussed in light of the developing sociological literature on pharmacy and medicines usage.
What is already known on this topic? People living with HIV (PLHIV) have greater incidence of comorbidities and higher prevalence of polypharmacy, most commonly defined as taking 5 or more medications concurrently, than the general population. What is added by this study? PLHIV reporting polypharmacy had significantly worse overall health outcomes, including significantly lower prevalence of self-reported virologic control and treatment satisfaction. These findings were significant despite controlling for presence of comorbidities. What are the implications for public health practice? By actively assessing patients holistically and considering how increased medication may influence individual behavior to health outcomes, clinicians may contribute to improving health-related quality of life among people living with HIV.
The PROgress study assessed the value and feasibility of implementing web-based patient-reported outcomes assessments (PROs) within routine HIV care at two North American outpatient clinics. People with HIV (PWH) completed PROs on a tablet computer in clinic before their routine care visit. Data collection included PROs from 1632 unique PWH, 596 chart reviews, 200 patient questionnaires, and 16 provider/staff questionnaires. During an initial setup phase involving 200 patients, PRO results were not delivered to providers; for all subsequent patients, providers received PRO results before the consultation. Chart review demonstrated that delivery of PRO results to providers improved patient-provider communication and increased the number of complex health and behavioral issues identified, recorded, and acted on, including suicidal ideation (88% with vs 38% without PRO feedback) and anxiety (54% with vs 24% without PRO feedback). In post-visit questionnaires, PWH (82%) and providers (82%) indicated that the PRO added value to the visit.
Objective To develop and evaluate in primary care a computerised decision support system for the management of stroke patients based upon 'patient profile decision analysis'. Design The decision support system incorporated the findings of 960 Markov models examining the decision to prescribe aspirin in the secondary prevention of stroke. The models reflected each combination of nine risk factors that determined a patient's profile. The evaluation comprised a qualitative interview and a questionnaire administered before and after the general practitioners (GPs) were given access to the support system. Setting Primary care. Participants 15 GPs from the West Midlands. Main outcome measures Decision certainty scoring of hypothetical patient vignettes. Qualitative perceptions of the applicability and acceptability of the system for primary care.Results After using the system, GPs were more certain of their decision making and made decisions more in line with national guidelines. Quantitative results further suggested that the system made decision making easier, improved feelings of being supported, improved the quality of decision making and increased satisfaction. Qualitative themes included that GPs thought the system could clarify their own decision making and improve GP-patient dialogue. Conclusions The feasibility of individualised decision analysis for general practice has been questioned. Patient profile decision analysis, however, may be a valuable means of harnessing some of the advantages of the methodology to produce more patient-specific guidelines for primary care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.