IntroductionSelf-management support can enable and empower people living with and beyond cancer to take an active role in managing long-term consequences of cancer treatment. Healthcare professionals are key to promoting patients to self-manage, however, they do not routinely engage in these discussions. This review aims to understand what works for whom and in what circumstances in relation to practitioners engaging with supporting people living with and beyond cancer to self-manage long-term consequences of systemic anticancer treatment.Methods and analysisWe will follow five steps for undertaking the realist review: (1) define the review scope, (2) develop initial programme theories, (3) evidence search, (4) selection and appraisal and (5) data extraction and synthesis. We will combine an informal literature search with a theory-based approach, using the theoretical domains framework, and stakeholder feedback to develop initial programme theories. We will search Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, ERIC and AMED databases to September 2019, and supplement this with citation tracking, grey literature and practitioner surveys. Data selection will be based on relevance and rigour. Data will be extracted and synthesised iteratively, and causal links between contexts, mechanism and outcomes illuminated in the process. The results will be reported according to the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards quality and publication standards.Ethics and disseminationWe have received ethical approval through the Research Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia (ref 2 01 819-124). We will disseminate to the research community through conference presentations and a peer-reviewed journal article. We will work with healthcare organisations, cancer charities and patients to agree a strategy for disseminating to these groups.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019120910.

Objectives This study aimed to determine the information needs and reported adherence of patients prescribed medicines for chronic conditions in those who have received a community pharmacy advanced service and those who have not.Methods A questionnaire was constructed using validated tools to measure medication information satisfaction and adherence together with questions eliciting information regarding the use of pharmacy services and demographic characteristics. This questionaire was distributed from four community pharmacies to a convenience sample of 400 patients as they collected their medicines. Patients were eligible if prescribed more than one regular medicine and attending the pharmacy for longer than three months. The questionnaire was returned directly to the university.Key Findings 232 (58%) questionnaires were returned. All respondents desired further information about their prescribed medicines, particularly about potential medication problems. Dissatisfaction centred on side effects, interactions and certain medicine characteristics such as how long it will take to act. Satisfaction with information about medicines and adherence were significantly greater in a subgroup reporting that they had received an advanced pharmacy service e.g. medicine use review. ConclusionPatients who had received an advanced service reported greater adherence and satisfaction with medicine related information. This was a small, observational study, using a convenience sample of four pharmacies; in order to draw definitive conclusions, a larger study with participants randomised to receive an advanced service is required.

No abstract

No abstract