Dataset Information

A pilot cluster randomised trial of the medicines and alcohol consultation (MAC): an intervention to discuss alcohol use in community pharmacy medicine review services.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Alcohol interventions are important to the developing public health role of community pharmacies. The Medicines and Alcohol Consultation (MAC) is a new intervention, co-produced with community pharmacists (CPs) and patients, which involves a CP practice development programme designed to integrate discussion of alcohol within existing NHS medicine review services. We conducted a pilot trial of the MAC and its delivery to investigate all study procedures to inform progression to a definitive trial. METHODS:This cluster pilot RCT was conducted in 10 community pharmacies in Yorkshire, UK, with a CP from each who regularly conducted Medicine Use Review (MUR) and New Medicine Service (NMS) consultations. Randomisation was conducted using a secure remote randomisation service. Intervention CPs (n?=?5) were trained to deliver the MAC in MUR/NMS consultations. Control CPs (n?=?5) provided these services as usual. Consecutive MUR/NMS patients were asked by CPs to participate, screened for eligibility (consumption of alcohol at least twice per week), and baseline data collected for those eligible. A two-month follow-up telephone interview was conducted. Blinding of CPs was not possible, but patients were blinded to the alcohol focus of the trial. Primary outcomes were total weekly UK units (8?g of ethanol per unit) of alcohol consumption in the week prior to follow-up, and confidence in medications management. Trial procedures were assessed by recruitment, attrition, and follow-up rates. RESULTS:260 patients were approached by CPs to take part in the trial, 68% (n?=?178) were assessed for eligibility and 30% (n?=?54) of these patients were eligible. Almost all eligible patients (n?=?51; 94%) consented to participate, of whom 92% (n?=?47) were followed-up at 2?months; alcohol consumption was lower in the intervention arm and confidence in medication management reduced slightly for both groups. Exploration of recall issues at follow-up showed a high level of agreement between a two-item quantity/frequency measure and 7-day guided recall of alcohol consumption. CONCLUSIONS:The pilot trial demonstrates the feasibility of implementing the MAC in community pharmacy and trial recruitment and data collection procedures. However, decommissioning of MURs means that it is not possible to conduct a definitive trial of the intervention in this service. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN57447996.

SUBMITTER: Stewart D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7552554 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A pilot cluster randomised trial of the medicines and alcohol consultation (MAC): an intervention to discuss alcohol use in community pharmacy medicine review services.

Stewart Duncan D van Dongen Anne A Watson Michelle M Mandefield Laura L Atkin Karl K Dhital Ranjita R Foster Brent B Gough Brendan B Hewitt Catherine C Madden Mary M Morris Stephanie S O'Carroll Ronan R Ogden Margaret M Parrott Steve S Watson Judith J White Sue S Whittlesea Cate C McCambridge Jim J

BMC health services research 20201012 1

<h4>Background</h4>Alcohol interventions are important to the developing public health role of community pharmacies. The Medicines and Alcohol Consultation (MAC) is a new intervention, co-produced with community pharmacists (CPs) and patients, which involves a CP practice development programme designed to integrate discussion of alcohol within existing NHS medicine review services. We conducted a pilot trial of the MAC and its delivery to investigate all study procedures to inform progression to ...[more]

PMID: 33046094

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) have been established at some National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in England, with the aim of providing medicines-related support to patients after they have been discharged. Addressing an important knowledge gap, this qualitative study sought to examine pharmacy professionals' experiences and perceptions of their PMHS, including perceived benefits of the services, and areas for improvement. METHODS:Invitations to participate were sent to all NHS Trusts within England that were known to provide a PMHS (n?=?117). Semi-structured interviews were conducted via telephone with 34 pharmacy professionals who provide a PMHS (female?=?76%, male?=?24%; predominantly from Acute NHS Trusts, 76%). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The RE-AIM framework for evaluating interventions (RE-AIM: Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) informed the development of the interview schedule and the analysis of the data using framework analysis. RESULTS:Two themes were generated from the analysis: Resources, and Perceived benefits. Findings illustrate how providing a PMHS with limited resources (e.g., no specific funding, understaffed) negatively impacts the implementation, maintenance and reach of PMHS, and the ability to evidence their effectiveness. Despite operating with limited resources, PMHS are considered to have many benefits for patients and healthcare organisations (e.g., providing a 'safety net' to patients during the transfer of care period, providing reassurance to patients, helping to optimise patients' medicines, resolving medicines-related errors, reducing the burden upon other services, and providing the potential to improve hospital services based upon the content of enquiries). However, actually establishing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PMHS is challenging due to perceived logistical difficulties of collecting data, and the difficulty measuring hard outcomes (e.g., prevention of readmissions). CONCLUSIONS:PMHS are typically perceived to be under-resourced, although they are considered by pharmacy professionals to have several benefits for service users and NHS Trusts. For those sites that provide a PMHS, we recommend using enquiry data to improve hospital services, and to share ideas for implementing and maintaining a PMHS within a resource-limited context. High-quality research is needed to evidence the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PMHS, which may help to secure adequate resources for this service in the future.

Project description:Objective:To investigate the feasibility and potential impact of a pharmacy care intervention, involving motivational interviews among patients with acute coronary syndrome, on adherence to medication and on health outcomes. Methods:This article reports a prospective, interventional, controlled feasibility/pilot study. Seventy one patients discharged from a London Heart Attack Centre following acute treatment for a coronary event were enrolled and followed up for 6?months. Thirty two pharmacies from six London boroughs were allocated into intervention or control sites. The intervention was delivered by community pharmacists face-to-face in the pharmacy, or by telephone. Consultations were delivered as part of the New Medicine Service or a Medication Usage Review. They involved a 15-20?min motivational interview aimed at improving protective cardiovascular medicine taking. Results:At 3?months, there was a statistically significant difference in adherence between the intervention group (M=7.7, SD=0.56) and the control group (M=7.0, SD=1.85), p=0.026. At 6?months, the equivalent figures were for the intervention group M=7.5, SD=1.47 and for the controls M=6.1, SD=2.09 (p=0.004). In addition, there was a statistically significant relationship between the level of adherence at 3?months and beliefs regarding medicines (p=0.028). Patients who reported better adherence expressed positive beliefs regarding the necessity of taking their medicines. However, given the small sample size, no statistically significant outcome difference in terms of recorded blood pressure and low density lipoprotein-cholesterol was observed over the 6?months of the study. Conclusions:The feasibility, acceptability and potentially positive clinical outcome of the intervention were demonstrated, long with a high level of patient acceptability. It had a significant impact on cardiovascular medicine taking adherence. But these findings must be interpreted with caution. The intervention should be tested in a larger trial to ascertain its full clinical utility. Trial registration number:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01920009.

Project description:BackgroundThe aim was to develop and evaluate a training program for physicians for communicating with breast cancer patients about complementary medicine (CM).MethodsIn a cluster-randomized pilot trial eight breast cancer centers (two physicians per center) were randomized to either a complementary communication training program (9 h e-learning + 20 h on-site skills training) or to a control group without training. Each physician was asked to consult ten patients for whom he or she is not the physician in charge. We used mixed methods: Quantitative outcomes included physicians' assessments (empathy, complexity of consultation, knowledge transfer) and patients' assessments (satisfaction, empathy, knowledge transfer). For qualitative analyses, 15 (eight in the training and seven in the control group) videotaped consultations were analyzed based on grounded theory, and separate focus groups with the physicians of both groups were conducted.ResultsA total of 137 patients were included. Although cluster-randomized, physicians in the two groups differed. Those in the training group were younger (33.4 ± 8.9 vs. 40.0 ± 8.5 years) and had less work experience (5.4 ± 8.9 vs. 11.1 ± 7.4 years). Patient satisfaction with the CM consultation was relatively high on a scale from 0 to 24 and was comparable in the two groups (training group: 19.4 ± 4.6; control group 20.5 ± 4.1). The qualitative findings showed that physicians structured majority of consultations as taught during the training. Comparing only the younger and less CM experienced physicians, those trained in CM communication felt more confident discussing CM-related topics than those without training.ConclusionA CM communication-training program might be especially beneficial for physicians with less consulting experience when communicating about CM-related issues. A larger trial using more suitable quantitative outcomes needs to confirm this.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02223091 , date of registration: 7 February 2014.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of clinical pharmacists in primary care has improved the control of several chronic cardiovascular conditions. However, many private physician practices lack the resources to implement team-based care with pharmacists. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether a centralized, remote, clinical pharmacy service could improve guideline adherence and secondary measures of cardiovascular risk in primary care offices in rural and small communities.Methods and resultsThis study was a prospective trial in 12 family medicine offices cluster randomized to either the intervention or usual care. The intervention was delivered for 12 months, and subjects had research visits at baseline and 12 months. The primary outcome was adherence to guidelines, and secondary outcomes included changes in key cardiovascular risk factors and preventative health measures. We enrolled 302 subjects. There was no improvement in the Guideline Advantage score from baseline to 12 months in the control group (64.7% versus 63.1%, respectively; P=0.21). There was a statistically significant improvement in the intervention group from 63.3% at baseline to 67.8% at 12 months (P=0.02). The estimated benefit of the intervention was 5.0%±2.4% (95% confidence interval=-0.5% to 10.4%; P=0.07). Several criteria were significantly better for intervention subjects, including appropriate statin therapy (P<0.001), body mass index, screening (P<0.001), and alcohol screening (P<0.001). Only 13.7% of subjects with diabetes mellitus had hemoglobin A1c at goal at baseline, and this increased to 30.8% and 21.0% in the intervention and control group, respectively, at 12 months (P=0.10).ConclusionsThe centralized, remote pharmacist intervention was successfully implemented. The improvements in outcomes were modest, in part because of higher than expected baseline guideline adherence. Future studies of this model should focus on patients with uncontrolled conditions at high risk for cardiovascular events.Clinical trial registrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 01983813.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Excessive wait times for specialist care pose a serious concern for many patients, leading to duplication of tests, patient anxiety, and poorer health outcomes. In response to this issue, many health care systems have begun implementing technological innovations designed to improve the referral-consultation process. Among these services is electronic consultation (eConsult), which connects primary care providers and specialists through a secure platform to facilitate discussion of patients' care. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to examine different eConsult services available worldwide and compare the strategies, barriers, and successes of their implementation in different health care contexts. METHODS:We conducted an environmental scan comprising 3 stages as follows: literature review; gray literature search; and targeted, semistructured key informant interviews. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (literature review) and Google (gray literature search). Upon completing the search, we generated a list of potential interview candidates from among the stakeholders identified. Potential participants included researchers, physicians, and decision makers. The maximum variation sampling was used to ensure sufficient breadth of participant experience. In addition, we conducted semistructured interviews by telephone using an interview guide based on the RE-AIM framework. Analyses of transcripts were conducted using a thematic synthesis approach. RESULTS:A total of 53 services emerged from the published and gray literature. Respondents from 10 services participated in telephonic interviews. The following 4 major themes emerged from the analysis: service structure; benefits of eConsult; implementation challenges; and implementation enablers. CONCLUSIONS:eConsult services have emerged in a variety of countries and health system contexts worldwide. Despite differences in structure, platform, and delivery of their services, respondents described similar barriers and enablers to the implementation and growth and reported improved access and high levels of satisfaction.

Dataset Information

A pilot cluster randomised trial of the medicines and alcohol consultation (MAC): an intervention to discuss alcohol use in community pharmacy medicine review services.

Publications

A pilot cluster randomised trial of the medicines and alcohol consultation (MAC): an intervention to discuss alcohol use in community pharmacy medicine review services.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets