Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34656171›Full record

ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2021

Addressing complex pharmacy consultations: methods used to develop a person-centred intervention to highlight alcohol within pharmacist reviews of medications.

Jim McCambridge, Karl Atkin, Ranjita Dhital, Brent Foster, Brendan Gough, Mary Madden, Stephanie Morris, Ronan O'Carroll, Margaret Ogden, Anne Van Dongen and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Early implementation of the structured medication review in England: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    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

13 authors.

Jim McCambridgeDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK. Jim.McCambridge@york.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5461-7001
Karl AtkinDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.
Ranjita DhitalDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Reading, Reading, UK.
Brent FosterWhitworths Chemists, Middlesbrough, UK.
Brendan GoughSchool of Social Sciences, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Mary MaddenDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.
Stephanie MorrisDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.
Ronan O'CarrollDepartment of Psychology, Stirling University, Stirling, UK.
Margaret OgdenDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.
Anne Van DongenDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.
Sue WhiteNorth of England Commissioning Support (NECS), Newcastle, UK.
Cate WhittleseaSchool of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Duncan StewartDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, Seebohm Rowntree Building, Heslington, YO10 5DD, York, UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0216-20002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlcohol is challenging to discuss, and patients may be reluctant to disclose drinking partly because of concern about being judged. This report presents an overview of the development of a medications review intervention co-produced with the pharmacy profession and with patients, which breaks new ground by seeking to give appropriate attention to alcohol within these consultations.

methodsThis intervention was developed in a series of stages and refined through conceptual discussion, literature review, observational and interview studies, and consultations with advisory groups. In this study we reflect on this process, paying particular attention to the methods used, where lessons may inform innovations in other complex clinical consultations.

resultsEarly work with patients and pharmacists infused the entire process with a heightened sense of the complexity of consultations in everyday practice, prompting careful deliberation on the implications for intervention development. This required the research team to be highly responsive to both co-production inputs and data gathered in formally conducted studies, and to be committed to working through the implications for intervention design. The intervention thus evolved significantly over time, with the greatest transformations resulting from patient and pharmacist co-design workshops in the second stage of the process, where pharmacists elaborated on the nature of the need for training in particular. The original research plans provided a helpful structure, and unanticipated issues for investigation emerged throughout the process. This underscored the need to engage dynamically with changing contexts and contents and to avoid rigid adherence to any early prescribed plan.

conclusionsAlcohol interventions are complex and require careful developmental research. This can be a messy enterprise, which can nonetheless shed new insights into the challenges involved in optimising interventions, and how to meet them, if embraced with an attitude of openness to learning. We found that exposing our own research plans to scrutiny resulted in changes to the intervention design that gained the confidence of different stakeholders. Our understanding of the methods used, and their consequences, may be bounded by the person-centred nature of this particular intervention.

Indexed as

PharmacistsPharmacyHumansReferral and ConsultationAlcoholBrief interventionComplex interventionsMedications reviewPerson-centredPharmacist

Identifiers

PMID34656171
PMCPMC8520232

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.