Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32533428›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2021

What predicts pharmacists' engagement with opioid-outcome screening? Secondary analysis from an implementation study in community pharmacy.

Suzanne Nielsen, Paul Sanfilippo, Louisa Picco, Raimondo Bruno, Michala Kowalski, Pene Wood, Sarah Larney

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Overview of this issue: "Pain management in an opioid crisis".International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2021
    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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Suzanne NielsenMonash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Suzanne.nielsen@monash.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5341-1055
Paul SanfilippoMonash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Louisa PiccoMonash Addiction Research Centre, Eastern Health Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Raimondo BrunoNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Michala KowalskiNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Pene WoodDepartment of Pharmacy and Biomedical Science, Latrobe University, Bendigo, VIC, Australia.
Sarah LarneyNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUEastern Health · AULa Trobe University · AUUniversity of Tasmania · AU

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1136944National Health and Medical Research Council 1163961
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Pharmacists have a key role to play in identifying and responding to emerging clinical problems with prescribed opioids. A pilot study in Australia examined the implementation of screening and brief intervention (Routine Opioid Outcome Monitoring [ROOM]) to identify and respond to opioid-related problems in community pharmacies. In this implementation study, the rate of screening varied considerably between pharmacies. Objective The aim of this study was to examine pharmacist characteristics associated with implementation of ROOM. Setting Community pharmacies in Victoria and New South Wales, Australia. Methods We implemented a validated computer-facilitated screening (ROOM), combined with brief intervention for opioid-related problems based on a widely accepted framework for monitoring outcomes. In this analysis, we examined the correlates of ROOM completion for individual pharmacists. Negative binomial regression was used to identify baseline predictors of greater screening, with the number of ROOM screens as the dependent (outcome) variable and pharmacist demographics, knowledge, confidence and comfort responding to prescription opioids problems, and attitudes towards evidence based practice examined as independent (predictor) variables. Main outcome measure Number of screens completed by an individual pharmacist as reported in follow-up surveys by pharmacist. Results Fewer years of practice was associated with a greater number of screenings conducted. On average, each additional decade of practice was associated with a 31% (95% CI 0%, 53%) reduction in the number of screenings undertaken by pharmacists. A multivariable analysis revealed that each additional decade practicing, lower knowledge of naloxone and lower confidence in identifying unmanaged pain were all independently associated with reduced engagement in screening after controlling for other variables. Conclusion Findings from this pilot study identified potential barriers to implementing opioid outcome monitoring. Further studies could test different groups of community pharmacists' experience of different barriers when implementing monitoring outcomes with prescribed opioids, to inform future implementation and clinical practice.

Indexed as

Community Pharmacy ServicesPharmaciesAnalgesics, OpioidHumansPharmacistsPilot ProjectsVictoriaAnalgesics, OpioidAustraliaCommunity pharmacyImplementationNaloxoneOpioidsOverdosePharmacy practice

Identifiers

PMID32533428
OpenAlexW3035088201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.