Humanistic outcomes and patient acceptance of the pharmacist-led medication review "Polymedication Check" in primary care in Switzerland: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Markus Messerli, Noortje Vriends, Kurt E Hersberger, Markus Messerli, Noortje Vriends, Kurt E Hersberger

Abstract

Background: Since 2010, Swiss pharmacists have been offering their patients a Polymedication Check (PMC), a new cognitive pharmacy service in the form of a medication review for patients taking ≥4 prescribed medicines for a period >3 months. While a first publication of this project reported on the impact of the PMC on patients' adherence, the present paper focuses on humanistic outcomes.

Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in 54 Swiss community pharmacies. After recruitment, the intervention group underwent a PMC in the pharmacy (T-0) and 28 weeks after T-0 (T-28), while the control group did not receive the PMC until 28 weeks after the study started (T-28). A clinical psychologist, blinded to the intervention, interviewed the patients 2 weeks (T-2) and 16 weeks (T-16) after T-0. Interviewer and patient both rated patient's knowledge of own medicines use. Furthermore, patients reported satisfaction with their pharmacy and appraisal of their medicines use. The availability of a written medication plan was assessed at T-16. Acceptance of the service was measured using a patient's self-report questionnaire at T-28.

Results: General linear model analysis for knowledge about medicines revealed a significant effect on the factor "group" (P=5.86, p=0.016), indicating that the intervention group had higher ratings for knowledge about their medication at T-2 and T-16 compared to controls. The majority (83%) of patients judged the counseling by the pharmacist as being helpful for their daily medication management. Availability of a written medication plan was comparable in both groups (52.5% vs 52.7%, p>0.05).

Conclusion: For the first time, the benefits of a complex pharmacist-led intervention were evaluated in Swiss primary care with a randomized controlled trial. The PMC increased patients' subjective knowledge of their medicines compared to no medication review. The effect remained sustainable over time. Recommendations resulting from the pharmacist-led service were highly appreciated by the patients.

Keywords: community pharmacy; humanistic outcomes; medication review; patient acceptance; patient knowledge; pharmaceutical care; polypharmacy.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow chart with relevant outcome measurements at study start (T-0), after 2 and 16 weeks (T-2 and T-16), and at study end after 28 weeks (T-28).

References

    1. Hersberger KE, Messerli M. Development of clinical pharmacy in Switzerland: involvement of community pharmacists in care for older patients. Drugs Aging. 2016;33(3):205–211.
    1. Ryan R, Santesso N, Lowe D, et al. Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014(4):CD007768.
    1. Messerli M, Vriends N, Blozik E, Hersberger KE. Impact of a community pharmacist-led medication review on medicines use – a prospective randomised controlled trial. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16:145.
    1. Eichenberger PM, Lampert ML, Kahmann IV, van Mil JW, Hersberger KE. Classification of drug-related problems with new prescriptions using a modified PCNE classification system. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(3):362–372.
    1. Niquille A, Lattmann C, Bugnon O. Medication reviews led by community pharmacists in Switzerland: a qualitative survey to evaluate barriers and facilitators. Pharm Pract (Granada) 2010;8(1):35–42.
    1. Rosenthal M, Austin Z, Tsuyuki RT. Are pharmacists the ultimate barrier to pharmacy practice change? Can Pharm J. 2010;143(1):37–42.
    1. Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) Application guide for assumption of costs for new or controversial services. 2009. Available from: .
    1. Messerli M, Lottaz V, Vriends N, Hersberger K. Collaborative development of outcome measures to investigate intermediate medication reviews provided in community pharmacies. Int J Clin Pharm. 2013;35(3):502.
    1. DePretto D. Experiences of Pharmacists and Patients Six Months After Implementation of the Polymedication-Check in Switzerland [master’s thesis] Switzerland: Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, University of. Basel; 2011.
    1. Messerli M, DePretto D, Hersberger K. Polymedication check – first experiences with a new reimbursed cognitive service. Int J Clin Pharm. 2012;34(1):214–215.
    1. Holland R, Lenaghan E, Harvey I, et al. Does home based medication review keep older people out of hospital? The HOMER randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2005;330(7486):293.
    1. Grymonpre RE, Williamson DA, Montgomery PR. Impact of a pharmaceutical care model for non-institutionalised elderly: results of a randomised, controlled trial. Int J Pharm Pract. 2001;9(4):235–241.
    1. Latif A, Pollock K, Boardman HF. The contribution of the medicines use review (MUR) consultation to counseling practice in community pharmacies. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;83(3):336–344.
    1. Hommel KA, Davis CM, Baldassano RN. Objective versus subjective assessment of oral medication adherence in pediatric inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2009;15(4):589–593.
    1. Trindade AJ, Ehrlich A, Kornbluth A, Ullman TA. Are your patients taking their medicine? Validation of a new adherence scale in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and comparison with physician perception of adherence. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2011;17(2):599–604.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Medicines Optimisation: The Safe and Effective Use of Medicines to Enable the Best Possible Outcomes. Manchester: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2015.
    1. Botermann L, Krueger K, Eickhoff C, Kloft C, Schulz M. Patients’ handling of a standardized medication plan: a pilot study and method development. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:621–630.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M, Medical Research Council Guidance Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337:a1655.
    1. Arnet I, Kooij MJ, Messerli M, Hersberger KE, Heerdink ER, Bouvy M. Proposal of standardization to assess adherence with medication records: methodology matters. Ann Pharmacother. 2016;50(5):360–368.
    1. Arnet I, Abraham I, Messerli M, Hersberger KE. A method for calculating adherence to polypharmacy from dispensing data records. Int J Clin Pharm. 2014;36(1):192–201.
    1. Mabotuwana T, Warren J, Kennelly J. A computational framework to identify patients with poor adherence to blood pressure lowering medication. Int J Med Inform. 2009;78(11):745–756.
    1. Arnet I, Metaxas C, Walter PN, Morisky DE, Hersberger KE. The 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale translated in German and validated against objective and subjective polypharmacy adherence measures in cardiovascular patients. J Eval Clin Pract. 2015;21(2):271–277.
    1. Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee (PSNC) National target groups for MURs. 2015. [Accessed September 15, 2017]. Available from:
    1. McCarney R, Warner J, Iliffe S, van Haselen R, Griffin M, Fisher P. The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:30.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj