Pharmacist-led medication review in patients over 65: a randomized, controlled trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND: regular medication review has been recommended for those over 75 and those on multiple drug therapy. Pharmacists are a potential source of assistance in reviewing medication. Evidence of the benefits of this process is needed. OBJECTIVE: to study the effect of medication review led by a pharmacist on resolution of pharmaceutical care issues, medicine costs, use of health and social services and health-related quality of life. DESIGN: randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: general medical practices in the Grampian region of Scotland. SUBJECTS: patients aged at least 65 years, with at least two chronic disease states who were taking at least four prescribed medicines regularly. METHODS: pharmacists reviewed the drug therapy of 332 patients, using information obtained from the practice computer, medical records and patient interviews. In 168 patients, a pharmaceutical care plan was then drawn up and implemented. The 164 control patients continued to receive normal care. All outcome measures were assessed at baseline and after 3 months. RESULTS: all patients had at least two pharmaceutical care issues at baseline. Half of these were identified from the prescription record, the rest from notes and patient interview. Of all the issues, 21% were resolved by information found in notes and 8.5% by patient interview. General practitioners agreed with 96% of all care issues documented on the care plans in the intervention group. At the time of follow-up, 70% of the remaining care issues had been resolved in the intervention group, while only 14% had been resolved in the control group. There were no changes in medicine costs or health-related quality of life in either group. There were small increases in contacts with health-care professionals and slightly fewer hospital admissions among the intervention group than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: pharmacist-led medication review has the capacity to identify and resolve pharmaceutical care issues and may have some impact on the use of other health services.

Grampian Health Board's joint drug formulary.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a model for creating a joint general practice-hospital formulary, using the example of ulcer healing drugs. DESIGN: A joint formulary development group produced draft guidelines based on an earlier hospital formulary, which were sent to interested local general practitioners for consultation. Revised guidelines were then drawn up and forwarded to the health board's medicines committee for approval and distribution. SETTING: Grampian Health Board. SUBJECTS: Nine members of joint formulary development group plus local general practitioners who were invited to comment on a list of 11 ulcer healing drugs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Degree of coincidence of drugs selected by hospital doctors and general practitioners. RESULTS: The ulcer healing drugs selected by the panel of general practitioners and by hospital doctors were highly coincident. The cost of one day's treatment with drugs varied considerably between hospital and general practice--for example, one drug cost 46p in hospital and 1 pounds in general practice and another cost 1.26 pounds in hospital and 1.01 pounds in general practice. Overall, six drugs cost more in hospital and five cost more in general practice. CONCLUSIONS: A joint formulary for use in hospitals and general practice in a health board can be devised fairly simply by consultation as virtually the same drugs are used in both types of practice. It should influence the health board's expenditure on drugs and affect the choice of drugs when a patient is discharged from hospital or is referred to any hospital in the region.

Standardization of core data for practice annual reports: a pilot study.

To investigate the feasibility of a standardized practice annual report, nine general medical practices in Grampian region collected data over a four month trial period. The definitions for core data used were arrived at after considerable consultation and discussion. They were found to be workable indicators of practice activity enabling comparisons to be made between practices. Three practices reported that they were completing forms more accurately and that this had led to increased item of service income. The results from this study show smaller variations than have been previously reported and there is a case to be made for the pooling and collation of such defined core data. Analysis of this practice activity would provide the stimulus for further research.