ArticleBMC family practice2013
Medicines use reviews: a potential resource or lost opportunity for general practice?
Article in BMC family practice, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of pharmacist home visits for individuals at risk of medication-related problems: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- Advancing Pharmaceutical Care in Community Pharmacies in Poland: A Blueprint for Enhanced Patient Care Quality.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Medication use review: does it have a future and potential in Latvia? The opinion of pharmacists after the pilot project.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2023Article
- The principles of person-centredness in quality patient care-Evaluation of the Community Pharmacy Services Quality Guidelines in Estonia.The International journal of health planning and management · 2022Article
- Factors Facilitating and Hindering Development of a Medication Use Review Service in Eastern Europe and Iran-Cross-Sectional Exploratory Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Medicines use review service in community pharmacies in Spain: REVISA project.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2021Article
- Impact of the 2016 Policy Change on the Delivery of MedsCheck Services in Ontario: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Asthma-Targeted MURs: How Confident are Community Pharmacists in Delivering Different Interventions?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Perceptions of UK Community Pharmacists on Current Consultation Skills and Motivational Interviewing as a Consultation Approach: A Qualitative Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- 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
- Community pharmacists' perspectives on implementation of Medicines Use Review in Slovenia.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2018Article
- Patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a medication review in primary care: a qualitative thematic analysis.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Article
- Article
- Community pharmacy Medicines Use Review: current challenges.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2017Review
- Factors affecting the delivery of community pharmacist-led medication reviews: evidence from the MedsCheck annual service in Ontario.BMC health services research · 2016Article
- Medication use review in Qatar: are community pharmacists prepared for the extended professional role?International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2014Article
- Drug-related problems identified by pharmacists conducting medication use reviews at a primary health center in Qatar.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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient non-adherence to medicines represents a significant waste of health resource and lost opportunity for health gain. Medicine management services are a key health policy strategy to encourage patients to take medicines as they are prescribed. One such service is the English Medicines Use Review (MUR) which is an NHS-funded community pharmacy service involving a patient-pharmacist consultation aiming to improve patients' knowledge of medicines and their use. To date the evidence for MURs to improve patient health outcomes is equivocal and GPs are reported to be sceptical about the value of the service. This paper presents the patient's perspective of the MUR service and focuses on the importance of GP-pharmacist collaboration for patient care. Suggestions on how MURs may have value to GPs through the delivery of increased patient benefit are discussed.
methodA qualitative study involving ten weeks of ethnographic observations in two English community pharmacies. Observations were made of all pharmacy activities including patient-pharmacist MUR consultations. Subsequent interviews with these patients were conducted to explore their experience of the service. Interviews with the pharmacy staff were conducted after the period of observations. A thematic approach was used to analyse the data.
resultsFifty-four patients agreed to have their MUR observed of which thirty-four were interviewed. Seventeen pharmacy staff were also interviewed. Patients reported positive views about MURs. However, there was little evidence suggesting that pharmacists and GPs were working collaboratively or communicating outcomes resulting from MURs. MURs were conducted in isolation from other aspects of patient care. Patients considered GPs to have authority over medicines making a few wary that MURs had the potential to cause tensions between these professionals and possibly adversely affect their own relationship with their doctor.
conclusionsThis study reveals the potential for effective GP-pharmacist collaboration to improve the capacity of the MUR service to support patient medicine taking. Closer collaboration between GPs and pharmacists could potentially improve patients' use of medicines and associated health care outcomes. The current lack of such collaboration constitutes a missed opportunity for pharmacists and GPs to work together with patients to improve effective prescribing and optimise patient use of medicines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.