Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39263193›Full record

ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2024

Barriers and facilitators to implement the redispensing of unused oral anticancer drugs in clinical care: A hybrid-effectiveness type I study.

Elisabeth M Smale, Eva W Verkerk, Eibert R Heerdink, Toine C G Egberts, Bart J F van den Bemt, Charlotte L Bekker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Elisabeth M SmaleRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Pharmacy, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Eva W VerkerkRadboud University Medical Center, Department of IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Eibert R HeerdinkUniversity Medical Centre Utrecht, Division of Laboratory, Genetics and Pharmacy, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Toine C G EgbertsUniversity Medical Centre Utrecht, Division of Laboratory, Genetics and Pharmacy, Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Bart J F van den BemtRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Pharmacy, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Charlotte L BekkerRadboud University Medical Center, Department of Pharmacy, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Minimizing medication waste through the redispensing of oral anticancer drugs (OADs) that were unused by patients provides economic and environmental benefits, but this is not yet universally implemented in clinical care. ObjectiveS: To identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of redispensing unused OADs in clinical care. Methods: A multicentre intervention study following a hybrid effectiveness-implementation type I design was conducted, consisting of semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders involved in the redispensing program: pharmacy employees, prescribing clinicians in oncology and haematology, patients who participated in redispensing and patients who declined trial participation. Questions encompassed experiences and suggestions for future implementation. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided data collection and categorisation of identified barriers and facilitators through thematic analysis. Results: In total, 35 interviews were conducted, identifying 15 themes encompassing barriers and facilitators, reflecting all CFIR domains. Facilitators encompassed: 1) convenient process requiring an acceptable time-investment; 2) support from project leaders and implementation champions; 3) being well-motivated by personal values and societal impact; 4) feeling ensured of medication quality upon redispensing; 5) endorsement by healthcare providers for patient participation; 6) clear and personal patient communication; 7) good visibility of intervention successes; and 8) implementation well supported through a collaborative network. Barriers encompassed: 1) unclear target population; 2) redispensing legally prohibited; 3) absence of financial compensation for pharmacies; 4) complexity arising from two parallel work processes; 5) widespread communication on adjustments within local teams challenging; 6) patient's low receptiveness due to burden of oncology treatment; and 7) lack of familiarization among pharmacy technicians. Conclusions: Facilitators for implementation of redispensing unused drugs mainly related to people's values, motivation, and societal demand, whereas barriers mainly encompassed practical issues, including knowledge, time, financial resources, and legal conditions. Strategies emphasizing the benefits of redispensing and further streamlining process compatibility could support implementation.

Indexed as

Hybrid effectiveness-implementation designMedication redispensingMedication wasteOral anticancer drugsQualitative researchStakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID39263193
PMCPMC11388756

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.