ArticlePloS one2024
Integrating design thinking and implementation science principles in delivering a medication review service in the community pharmacy setting-An implementation testing study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedication review (MR) services are evidenced-based practices in which a systematic assessment of a patient's medication is conducted, primarily aiming to optimize drug therapy and minimize adverse drug events through pharmacist interventions. Although studies show that MR services are effective, the implementation of MR services in Malaysia has been challenging due to several barriers. An MR services blueprint was developed to be adapted to the Malaysian community pharmacy setting as part of tailoring strategies.
objectiveThrough utilizing the design thinking triple diamond model and implementation science principles, a powerful guide for healthcare researchers and stakeholders to assist with effective service implementation, this study aimed to evaluate the implementation testing and observe the effectiveness of the developed MR service blueprint.
methodThe study utilizes an effectiveness-implementation Type 3 hybrid implementation science framework conducted from May 2021 to April 2022. Employing a qualitative ethnographic approach, researchers observed pharmacy study sites during the implementation of MR services. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected across exploration, preparation, testing, and operational phases. Implementation outcomes evaluated include phases, reach, fidelity, acceptability, as well as implementation barriers and strategies. MR intervention outcomes included service characteristics and the number and type of drug-related problems and interventions offered.
results17 community pharmacists were invited to pilot the MR service blueprint for six months in their setting. Of this, 78.5% (n = 11) of the pharmacies reached the testing phase, and 36% (n = 4) reached the implementation phase. Fifty-four patients were in the study, giving an implementation reach of 70%. The majority of surveyed patients expressed satisfaction with the service. The total DRP identified was 133, and 64 interventions were provided by the pharmacists. Facilitation strategies such as "Engage stakeholders by creating ownership of the change" and "Equip stakeholders with training" are needed to overcome the barriers.
conclusionThis study marked the beginning of successful MR service implementation at Malaysian community pharmacies. Future studies with multi-level partnered strategies are required to reach full implementation and sustainability.
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.