Search

Introduction: Nurse and pharmacist independent prescribers manage patients with respiratory tract infections and are responsible for around 8% of all primary care antibiotic prescriptions. A range of factors influence the prescribing behaviour of these professionals, however, there are no interventions available specifically to support appropriate antibiotic prescribing behaviour by these groups. The aims of this paper are to describe (1) the development of an intervention to support appropriate antibiotic prescribing by nurse and pharmacist independent prescribers and (2) an acceptability and feasibility study designed to test its implementation with these prescribers. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: Development of intervention: a three-stage, eight-step method was used to identify relevant determinants of behaviour change and intervention components based on the Behaviour Change Wheel. The intervention is an online resource comprising underpinning knowledge and an interactive animation with a variety of open and closed questions to assess understanding. Acceptability and feasibility of intervention: nurse and pharmacist prescribers (n=12-15) will use the intervention. Evaluation includes semi-structured interviews to capture information about how the user reacts to the design, delivery and content of the intervention and influences on understanding and engagement, and a pre-post survey to assess participants' perceptions of the impact of the intervention on knowledge, confidence and usefulness in terms of application to practice. Taking an initial inductive approach, data from interview transcripts will be coded and then analysed to derive themes. These themes will then be deductively mapped to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour model. Descriptive statistics will be used to analyse the survey data, and trends identified., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval for the study has been provided by the School of Healthcare Sciences Research Governance and Ethics Committee, Cardiff University. The findings will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals and through conference presentations., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a major cause of morbidity and premature mortality globally. Despite the availability of low-cost evidence based medicines, there is a significant treatment gap in those with established or at high risk of CVD in the primary care setting. Pharmacist-based interventions have shown to improve patient outcomes for many chronic diseases including CVD. However, there is little synthesised evidence that has examined the effects of collaborative care between general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists on patients' cardiovascular risk outcomes. This protocol aims to outline the methods employed in a systematic review of current literature to assess whether interprofessional collaboration between GPs and pharmacists has an impact on improving cardiovascular risk outcomes among patients in the primary care setting., Methods and Analysis: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) will be identified through database searches, scanning reference lists of relevant studies, hand searching of key journals and citation searching of key papers. Two independent reviewers will screen studies against eligibility criteria and extract data using standardised forms. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, will be searched from the beginning of each database until October 2018. Primary outcome includes improvement in cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, due to GP and pharmacist cooperation. Secondary outcome is to describe the different types of GP and pharmacist collaborative models of care. A narrative synthesis of findings will be presented. A meta-analysis will be performed if the data are homogenous., Ethics and Dissemination: This study does not require ethics approval. The results of the systematic review described within this protocol will be disseminated through presentations at relevant conferences and publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The methods will be used to inform future reviews., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42017055259., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Redispensing by pharmacies of medication unused by another patient could contribute to optimal use of healthcare resources. This study aimed to assess patient willingness to use medication returned by another patient and patient characteristics associated with this willingness., Design: Cross-sectional survey., Setting: A total of 41 community and 5 outpatient pharmacies in the Netherlands., Participants: Total of 2215 pharmacy visitors., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Patients completed a questionnaire regarding their willingness to use medication returned unused to the pharmacy by another patient, assuming quality was guaranteed. Secondary outcome measures included patient sociodemographic characteristics that were associated with patient willingness, analysed using logistic regression analysis and reported as ORs with 95% CIs., Results: Of the 2215 patients (mean (SD) age 50.6(18.0) years; 61.4% female), 61.2% were willing to use medication returned unused to the pharmacy by another patient. Patients who were unwilling mostly found it risky. Men were more willing to use returned medication (OR 1.3 95% CI 1.1 to 1.6), as did patients with a high educational level (OR 1.8 95% CI 1.3 to 2.5), those who regularly use 1-3 medications (OR 1.3 95% CI 1.1 to 1.7), those who returned medication to the pharmacy for disposal (OR 1.5 95% CI 1.0 to 2.3) and those who ever had unused medication themselves (OR 1.3 95% CI 1.1 to 1.6)). Patients with non-Dutch cultural background were less willing to use returned medication (OR 0.395% CI 0.3 to 0.4))., Conclusions: When quality is guaranteed, a substantial proportion of patients are willing to use medication returned unused to the pharmacy by another patient. This suggests that implementation of redispensing may be supported by patients., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Effective antibiotic options in general practice for patients with infections are declining significantly due to antibiotic over-prescribing and emerging antibiotic resistance. To better improve antibiotic prescribing by general practitioner (GP), pharmacist-GP collaborations have been promoted under antibiotic stewardship programmes. However, there is insufficient information about whether and how pharmacists help GPs to more appropriately prescribe antibiotics. This systematic review aims to determine whether pharmacist-led or pharmacist-involved interventions are effective at improving antibiotic prescribing by GPs., Methods and Analysis: A systematic review of English language randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, controlled before-and-after studies and interrupted time series studies cited in MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL Plus, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science databases will be conducted. Studies will be included if a pharmacist is involved as the intervention provider and GPs are the intervention recipients in general practice setting. Data extraction and management will be conducted using Effective Practice and Organisation of Care data abstraction tools and a template for intervention description and replication. The Cochrane and ROBINS-I risk of bias assessment tools will be used to assess the methodological quality of studies. Primary outcome measures include changes (overall, broad spectrum and guidelines concordance) of GP-prescribed antibiotics. Secondary outcomes include quality of antibiotic prescribing, delayed antibiotic use, acceptability and feasibility of interventions. Meta-analysis for combined effect and forest plots, χ 2 test and I 2 statistics for detailed heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis will be performed if data permit. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidance will be used to report findings., Ethics and Dissemination: No ethics approval is required as no primary, personal or confidential data are being collected in this study. The findings will be disseminated to national and international scientific sessions and published in a peer-reviewed journal., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42017078478., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)