Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30454023›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2018

Operating a patient medicines helpline: a survey study exploring current practice in England using the RE-AIM evaluation framework.

Matt Williams, Abbie Jordan, Jenny Scott, Matthew D Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Matt WilliamsDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, University of Bath, 5 West, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Abbie JordanDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, 10 West, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Jenny ScottDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, University of Bath, 5 West, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Matthew D JonesDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, University of Bath, 5 West, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK. m.d.jones@bath.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2617-4098

Funding

University of Bath N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient medicines helplines provide a means of accessing medicines-related support following hospital discharge. However, it is unknown how many National Health Service (NHS) Trusts currently provide a helpline, nor how they are operated. Using the RE-AIM evaluation framework (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance), we sought to obtain key data concerning the provision and use of patient medicines helplines in NHS Trusts in England. This included the extent to which the delivery of helplines meet with national standards that are endorsed by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (standards pertaining to helpline access, availability, and promotion).

methodsAn online survey was sent to Medicines Information Pharmacists and Chief Pharmacists at all 226 acute, mental health, specialist, and community NHS Trusts in England in 2017.

resultsAdoption: Fifty-two percent of Trusts reported providing a patient medicines helpline (acute: 67%; specialist: 41%; mental health: 29%; community: 18%). Reach: Helplines were predominantly available for discharged inpatients, outpatients, and carers (98%, 95% and 93% of Trusts, respectively), and to a lesser extent, the local public (22% of Trusts). The median number of enquiries received per week was five. IMPLEMENTATION: For helpline access, 54% of Trusts reported complying with all 'satisfactory' standards, and 26% reported complying with all 'commendable' standards. For helpline availability, the percentages were 86% and 5%, respectively. For helpline promotion, these percentages were 3% and 40%. One Trust reported complying with all standards. Maintenance: The median number of years that helplines had been operating was six. Effectiveness: main perceived benefits included patients avoiding harm, and improving patients' medication adherence.

conclusionsPatient medicines helplines are provided by just over half of NHS Trusts in England. However, the proportion of mental health and community Trusts that operate a helpline is less than half of that of the acute Trusts, and there are regional variations in helpline provision. Adherence to the national standards could generally be improved, although the lowest adherence was regarding helpline promotion. Recommendations to increase the use of helplines include increasing the number of promotional methods used, the number of ways to contact the service, and the number of hours that the service is available.

Indexed as

Clinical Pharmacy Information SystemsDelivery of Health CareEnglandFacilities and Services UtilizationHotlinesHumansNational Health ProgramsPatientsPharmacistsPharmacy Service, HospitalPilot ProjectsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Surveys and QuestionnairesClinical auditDrug informationHospital pharmacyMedicines informationNational Health ServicePatient medicines helplinesRE-AIM

Identifiers

PMID30454023
PMCPMC6245845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.