ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS2008
Community pharmacists' attitudes towards medicines use reviews and factors affecting the numbers performed.
Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Primary health care roles of community pharmacists in low- and middle-income countries: a mixed methods systematic review.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Factors influencing national implementation of innovations within community pharmacy: a systematic review applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.Implementation science : IS · 2019Pooled it
- Vitamin D testing in pharmacies: Results of a federal screening campaign.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- The landscape of self-care in Australia: A pharmacy perspective.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- Article
- Pharmacy professionals' views regarding the future of NHS patient medicines helpline services: a multimethod qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Balancing traditional activities and cognitive pharmaceutical services by community pharmacists: a work sampling study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2019Article
- Observational
- Community pharmacists' perspectives on implementation of Medicines Use Review in Slovenia.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
- Community pharmacists' views of using a screening tool to structure medicines use reviews for older people: findings from qualitative interviews.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
- Positioning pharmacists' roles in primary health care: a discourse analysis of the compensation plan in Alberta, Canada.BMC health services research · 2017Article
- Article
- Self-care of long-term conditions: patients' perspectives and their (limited) use of community pharmacies.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2017Article
- Patient opinions on medicine-use review: exploring an expanding role of community pharmacists.Patient preference and adherence · 2017Article
- The UK Pharmacy Care Plan service: Description, recruitment and initial views on a new community pharmacy intervention.PloS one · 2017Article
- Community pharmacy Medicines Use Review: current challenges.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2017Review
- Comparison of pharmacist and public views and experiences of community pharmacy medicines-related services in England.Patient preference and adherence · 2016Article
- The influence of pharmacy and pharmacist characteristics on the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2015Article
- Medication use review in Qatar: are community pharmacists prepared for the extended professional role?International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2014Article
- Community pharmacies automation: any impact on counselling duration and job satisfaction?International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective of the studyMedicines use review and prescription intervention ('MUR services') is the first advanced service within the NHS community pharmacy contract and is a structured review that is undertaken by a pharmacists with patients on multiple medicines. The objective of this study was to investigate factors that influence the number of Medicines use reviews (MURs) performed by community pharmacists and to explore community pharmacists' attitudes towards the service. Setting This study was conducted with pharmacists who were employed by one UK community pharmacy chain.
methodA questionnaire was developed to investigate factors that influence the number of MURs performed and pharmacists' attitudes towards MURs. It consisted of a series of attitudinal statements together with brief demographic data. Questionnaires were distributed to a sample of 280 pharmacists accredited to provide the service during April and May 2006.
main outcome measureFactors affecting the number of MURs performed and community pharmacists' attitudes towards MURs.
resultsSixty per cent (167/280) of pharmacists returned a completed questionnaire. Twenty-seven per cent of respondents had not performed any MURs, 43% had conducted one to 14 reviews and 31% had conducted 15 or more. Job title affected the number of reviews performed; respondents categorised as 'Store based' pharmacists performed significantly more MURs than those working as 'Locums' but not significantly more than 'Managing' pharmacists. Pharmacists reporting access to an accredited consultation area performed significantly more MURs than those who did not. Those working more than 20 h per week performed significantly more MURs than those working less. Gender, time since qualification, the pharmacy size and those having or currently undertaking a clinical diploma were not found to be associated with the number of MURs performed. Most respondents reported that MURs were an opportunity for pharmacist to use their professional skills in an extended role and patients would benefit from the service. However they reported concerns about GPs opinion of the service, lack of time and support staff to conduct MURs and were unhappy about consultation areas.
conclusionThis study demonstrates that pharmacists perceive MURs to be an opportunity for an extended role and of value to patients. However, this study has identified perceived barriers, including the availability of a consultation area suitable for performing MURs, time to perform MURs and support staff. The number of MURs performed by pharmacists appears to be affected by the pharmacists' job title, their working hours and the presence of a consultation area. Additional support for 'locum' pharmacists was also highlighted and may be needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18288585What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.