Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35840960›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2022

Evaluation of a training programme for Pharmacist Independent Prescribers in a care home medicine management intervention.

L Birt, L Dalgarno, C M Bond, R Holland, D P Alldred, C Hughes, A Blyth, L Watts, D J Wright, CHIPPS team

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

L BirtSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK. linda.birt@uea.ac.uk.
L DalgarnoSchool of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
C M BondSchool of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
R HollandLeicester Medical School, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
D P AlldredSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
C HughesSchool of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
A BlythSchool of Pharmacy, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, UK.
L WattsSchool of Pharmacy, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, UK.
D J WrightSchool of Allied Health Professions, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
CHIPPS team

Funding

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme RP-PG-0613-20007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe provision of independent prescribing rights for United Kingdom (UK) pharmacists has enabled them to prescribe within their area of competence. The aim of this study was to evaluate an evidence-based training programme designed to prepare Pharmacist Independent Prescribers (PIPs) to safely and effectively assume responsibility for pharmaceutical care of older people in care homes in the UK, within a randomised controlled trial.

methodsThe training and competency assessment process included two training days, professional development planning against a bespoke competency framework, mentor support, and a viva with an independent General Practitioner (GP). Data on the PIPs' perceptions of the training were collected through evaluation forms immediately after the training days and through online questionnaires and interviews after delivery of the 6-month intervention. Using a mixed method approach each data set was analysed separately then triangulated providing a detailed evaluation of the process. Kaufman's Model of Learning Evaluation guided interpretations.

resultsAll 25 PIPs who received the training completed an evaluation form (N = 25). Post-intervention questionnaires were completed by 16 PIPs and 14 PIPs took part in interviews. PIPs reported the training days and mentorship enabled them to develop a personalised portfolio of competence in preparation for discussion during a viva with an independent GP. Contact with the mentor reduced as PIPs gained confidence in their role. PIPs applied their new learning throughout the delivery of the intervention leading to perceived improvements in residents' quality of life and medicines management. A few PIPs reported that developing a portfolio of competence was time intensive, and that further training on leadership skills would have been beneficial.

conclusionsThe bespoke training programme was fit for purpose. Mentorship and competency assessment were resource intensive but appropriate. An additional benefit was that many PIPs reported professional growth beyond the requirement of the study.

trial registrationThe definitive RCT was registered with the ISRCTN registry (registration number ISRCTN 17,847,169 ).

Indexed as

General PractitionersPharmaceutical ServicesAgedHumansPharmacistsQuality of LifeSurveys and QuestionnairesCare homesDeprescribingIndependent prescribingMedicine managementPharmacistProfessional competencyTraining

Identifiers

PMID35840960
PMCPMC9287970

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.