Search

Rationale, Aims and Objectives: The rise in chronic diseases urges for an identification of interventions that improve adherence. However, no golden standard exists for evaluating adherence in polymedicated patients. The objectives were to investigate the impact of a pharmacist-led medication use review (MUR) service on adherence implementation rates for chronic medication, and to evaluate the appropriateness of two adherence calculation approaches in this regard., Method: Before-after study (SIMENON study) including ambulatory, aged, polymedicated patients. Refill data were used to calculate the proportion of days covered (PDC) per medication before and after the MUR. Adherence was assessed for chronic, solid, oral medication using a prescription-based and interval-based approach, and the performance of both approaches was compared., Results: Adherence was evaluated for 1483 medications from 316 patients. The median baseline PDC per medication was 0.95 (prescription-based method) and 0.91 (interval-based approach). Pearson correlation between both approaches was 0.616 (P < .0001). The prescription-based approach found less medication below the adherence threshold of 0.80 (319 medications; 21.5% vs 481 medications; 32.4%). Using the prescription-based approach, the proportion of non-adherent patients at baseline was 61.7% (195/316 patients), of which 54.9% (107/195 patients) was only non-adherent for one medication. Median PDC scores increased significantly from 0.95 to 0.99 and 0.91 to 0.99 with the prescription-based and interval-based approach respectively (both P < .0001). Only considering the 319 medications with baseline PDC scores <0.8 using the prescription-based approach, the median PDC scores significantly increased from 0.67 to 0.84 (P < .0001), with a median score improvement of 18.3%., Conclusions: Although baseline adherence was high in this population of polymedicated aged patients, both calculation methods showed the MUR significantly improved adherence. The prescription-based approach was considered the most appropriate method. Based on these findings and literature evidence, it is recommended to implement the MUR service in Belgium and target non-adherent patients for maximal effect., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In the SIMENON study, medication use reviews were conducted for older polymedicated home-dwelling patients across 56 Belgian community pharmacies., Objective: To evaluate the impact of the service on patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures, and to evaluate the suitability of the chosen instruments., Methods: A before-after design was used to measure the impact of the medication use review in a subset of patients, participating in the SIMENON study. Patients completed self-report questionnaires before and 3 and 12 weeks after the intervention by letter, phone or e-mail. Six outcomes were evaluated: medication-related quality of life, adherence, self-management, patient satisfaction, fall incidents and use of emergency healthcare services., Results: Questionnaires at baseline and endpoint were available for 83 patients (median age 77 years; median of 7 drugs) of 24 pharmacies. The Living with Medicines Questionnaire showed low medication burden at baseline (84.8/205) which increased to 85.7 three weeks later (n = 57; p = 0.219). Scores significantly reduced to 81.9 at twelve weeks (p = 0.031). The Probabilistic Medication Adherence Scale (n = 67) showed high median adherence scores at baseline (14/18) which remained unaltered (p = 0.974). The patient activation measure found low self-management in one third of the sample at baseline and endpoint (35.5% and 37.1% respectively; p = 0.243). The Patient Satisfaction with Pharmacist Services Questionnaire (n = 66) demonstrated high patient satisfaction. The number of patients with a hospitalization in the last three months decreased non-significantly from 14.8% to 11.1% in the post-measurement after 12 weeks (p = 0.227). No effect was observed on emergency room visits and falls., Conclusions: The medication use review reduced medication burden but did not impact the patient's adherence and self-management. However, adherence scores were high, medication burden was low at baseline and the sample size was limited. The Living with Medicines instrument is a promising instrument for future research to assess medication-related quality of life in older polymedicated patients., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The potential benefit of community pharmacist's involvement in continuity of care is well-known. However, it is not standard practice to exchange information with the community pharmacist (CP) after hospitalization., Objective: To construct and validate an evidence-based prototype of a discharge report for the community pharmacist., Methods: First, a review of literature, guidelines and established initiatives was performed to construct a preliminary discharge report. Secondly, the content of the discharge report was reviewed and optimized using semi-structured individual interviews with CPs and general practitioners (GPs)., Results: The review identified six guidelines for information exchange with the CP originating from three countries, 17 research papers and three local initiatives. Overall, 49 different elements for a discharge document were identified. Based on recurring elements, a preliminary discharge report was created. Interviews with ten CPs and nine GPs provided insights into which information is considered crucial for patient safety and why. This allowed an optimization of the document. The final discharge report consists of three categories: administrative, medication and medical data. The medication data includes medication registered at hospital admission as well as at hospital discharge, drug indications, reasons for initiating, adjusting or discontinuing therapies and start/stop dates. The medical data contains reasons for hospitalization, comorbidities and allergies., Conclusions: The literature review and semi-structured interviews resulted in an evidence-based prototype of a discharge report for the community pharmacist. This document contains both administrative, medical and medication data., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Aged polymedicated patients are particularly vulnerable for drug-related problems. A medication review aims to optimize the medication use of patients and improve health outcomes. In this study, the effect of a pharmacist-led medication use review is investigated for polymedicated ambulatory older patients with the aim of implementing this pharmaceutical care intervention across Belgium.Methods: This article describes the study protocol of the SIMENON study and reports the results of the feasibility study, which aimed to test and optimize this study protocol. In the SIMENON intervention study, 75 Belgian community pharmacies each recruit 12 patients for a medication use review. For each patient, the identified drug-related problems and subsequent interventions are registered using the PharmDISC classification. In a subset of Dutch speaking patients, a pretest-posttest single group design is used to measure the impact of this review on patient related outcomes using questionnaires. The main outcome of the study is the type and number of drug-related problems and related interventions. A second outcome is the impact of the medication use review on adherence, objectively measured with dispensing data. Evolution in medication related quality of life is another outcome, measured with the Living with Medicines Questionnaire version 3. Other patient reported outcomes include adherence, self-management, patient satisfaction, fall incidents and use of emergency healthcare services.Discussion: The findings of this study can provide data on the effectiveness of a medication use review in the Belgian primary care setting. Furthermore, it will provide insights in which patients benefit most of this intervention and therefore facilitate the implementation of medication review in Belgium.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03179722 . Retrospectively registered 7 June 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]