Pharmacists’ and patients’ views and feedback on Italian Medicines Use Review (I-MUR)

Abstract

Rationale, aims and objectives: Although medicine review services are offered by community pharmacists in many countries, they are non-existent in Italy. A novel intervention, I-MUR, was developed for patients with asthma aiming to improve medicines use. The aim of this study was to obtain pharmacists’ and patients’ views on the acceptability of the I-MUR service provided by community pharmacists to asthma patients in 4 Italian regions. Methods: Pharmacists’ expectations, experiences and attitudes to delivering the I-MUR were obtained through questionnaires distributed before and after delivering the I-MUR, plus focus groups. Patients’ views were obtained via questionnaires, distributed by the pharmacists and returned anonymously.Results: Seventy-four pharmacists provided the I-MUR service to 895 asthma patients; 49 pharmacists completed both questionnaires, 53 participated in focus groups and 246 patients returned questionnaires. Barriers anticipated most frequently by pharmacists before the I-MUR were lack of time (53%) and lack of co-ordination with other health professionals (61%), while lack of financial compensation was identified by 37%. Lack of co-ordination proved the most common actual barrier (88%), with lack of financial compensation being cited less frequently after providing the intervention (8%). Ninety-six percent of pharmacists anticipated providing both education on inhaler technique and medication counselling, but in practice slightly fewer had provided these (90% and 86% respectively). Focus groups highlighted a lack of relevant undergraduate education to support medication review and structural barriers within some pharmacies, but described positive patient feedback and a desire to extend the I-MUR. Patient respondents were positive; 62% indicated the reason for having an I-MUR as making sure that they were using medication correctly, 75% considered they benefited from it and 86% would recommend it to others.Conclusions: The I-MUR service was perceived positively by both pharmacists and patients, supporting the extension of medicine review services to community pharmacists in Italy in an enhancement of the person-centeredness of care.

Medication use review: does it have a future and potential in Latvia? The opinion of pharmacists after the pilot project

“…This was a qualitative, exploratory study using a focus group interview with pharmacists providing a pilot study of the MUR service, in community pharmacies in Latvia. Considering previous studies and focus group interview guides [ 6 , 7 ], the interview guidelines were developed. The open-ended interview questions covered topics such as the organization of the pilot project (quality of preparatory work, technical support, etc.…”

Consistency and replicability of a pharmacist-led intervention for asthma patients: Italian Medicines Use Review (I-MUR)

“…Patients were recruited by the pharmacists on the basis of either a diagnosis or prescription of medicines for asthma. Further details of all inclusion and exclusion criteria for pharmacies, pharmacists and patients have been published elsewhere (Manfrin et al ., 2015).…”

“…Phase 3, reported elsewhere (Manfrin et al, 2017), demonstrated that the I-MUR was both effective and cost-effective. Results from the evaluation (Phase 2) which obtained the views of pharmacists, patients and GPs on the I-MUR service provided during Phase 1 have also been published (Manfrin and Krska, 2018).…”

The relationship between the pharmacist's role, patient understanding and satisfaction during the provision of a cost‐effective pharmacist‐led intervention

“…All the information regarding the study setting, selection process of the participants, inclusion and exclusion criteria and the validated questionnaire used for data collection are published elsewhere. 15,28,33…”

“…14 During this project, patients', pharmacists' and GPs' feedback was collected, and a report and article were published. 15 However, the analysis did not look specifically at the interaction between the pharmacist's role and patient understanding and satisfaction during this bespoke pharmacist-led intervention.…”