ArticleIntegrated pharmacy research & practice2024
Unlicensed "Special" Medicines: Using the Pillar Integration Model to Understand Stakeholder Perspectives Across Care Settings.
Article in Integrated pharmacy research & practice, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of unlicensed medicines has been associated with safety concerns, availability and accessibility issues, and lack of integrated care across care settings. Objective: To understand the interaction between the views and experiences of those who prescribe, those who supply and those who receive unlicensed "special" medicines, so that factors affecting the patient journey and successful treatment can be identified and used to inform areas for change. Methods: A qualitative, phenomenological approach was adopted, with semi-structured interviews with prescribers, community pharmacy staff and patients. A combination of stratified, purposive, snowball and convenience sampling was used to identify participants. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and the findings were integrated using an adapted model of the Pillar Integration Process. Results: Three pillars were constructed after synthesising results from interviews with patients (n=4), prescribers (n=5) and pharmacy staff (n=6): the awareness of licensing status; perceptions of patient care and acceptability of unlicensed medicine use; and challenges associated with the accessibility of unlicensed medicines. The varying levels of awareness when unlicensed medicines are prescribed and the varying perceptions of responsibility and acceptability of the use of unlicensed medicines help to explain the challenges faced by participants across the patient journey, Challenges identified included understanding what unlicensed medicines are, awareness of the licensing status when unlicensed medicines are prescribed, managing care across care settings to ensure the patient is effectively treated and ensuring continuity of care for patients in the community. Conclusion: The results highlight a clear need for more integrated care and support for prescribers to reduce the chances of delays between care settings, and more patient-centred care to ensure that any delays when accessing medicines do not lead to treatment disruption for the patient. The new national guidelines informed by findings of this study can support policy-makers across the globe.
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.