Identifying the important outcomes to measure for pharmacy-led, clinical services within primary care: A nominal group technique approach.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of clinical pharmacy services is part of a multi-disciplinary approach to reduce pressure on primary care. Ascertaining the impact of clinical pharmacists in general practice is vital to ensure intended benefits are achieved. However, this is complicated by poor quality evidence, multiple interventions, and a lack of agreement regarding outcome measures. OBJECTIVES: To develop an outcomes framework for clinical pharmacy services delivered in Scottish general practice using a consensus methodology. METHODS: A modified nominal group technique (NGT) was conducted using Microsoft Teams and Qualtrics. This involved a pre-NGT questionnaire, silent generation of ideas, round robin, discussions, ranking, and a final consensus exercise. A selective sampling strategy recruited experienced pharmacists from Scottish health regions. NGT ranking results were used to signify relative importance of the outcome areas. NGT discussions underwent inductive thematic analysis to explore key areas considered. RESULT: Overall, 13 (median: 24 years of experience) pharmacists participated, representing 11 of 14 Scottish regions. In total, 21 outcome areas, derived from the literature and a pre-NGT questionnaire, were considered during the NGT ranking exercise. Consensus identified five important outcome areas: Patient Experience, Medication Related Adverse Events, Cost-Effectiveness, Medication Optimisation, and Health Related Quality of Life. Thematic analysis highlighted the importance of the outcome framework's target audience, factors influencing the interpretation of outcomes, and the feasibility of the associated outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: The five key outcome areas will facilitate evidence-based decisions regarding service delivery. Future work should develop a measurement plan, involving routinely collected sources of outcomes data. The feasibility of collecting outcomes in the real-world context should be considered, identifying measures which are easy to collect within existing data infrastructures. This paper describes a replicable method to gain consensus for a national approach to data collection from a strong theoretical basis using an online methodology.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on pharmacy personnel in primary care.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted healthcare worldwide. It has altered service delivery and posed challenges to practitioners in relation to workload, well-being and support. Within primary care, changes in physicians' activities have been identified and innovative work solutions implemented. However, evidence is lacking regarding the impact of the pandemic on pharmacy personnel who work in primary care. AIM: To explore the impact of the pandemic on the working practice (including the type of services provided) and job satisfaction of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians within Scottish general practice. Due to the stressful nature of the pandemic, we hypothesise that job satisfaction will have been negatively affected. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed in May-July 2021, approximately 15 months since initial lockdown measures in the UK. The questionnaire was informed by previous literature and underwent expert review and piloting. Analysis involved descriptive statistics, non-parametric statistical tests and thematic analysis. RESULTS: 180 participants responded (approximated 16.1% response rate): 134 pharmacists (74.4%) and 46 technicians (25.6%). Responses indicated greater involvement with administrative tasks and a reduction in the provision of clinical services, which was negatively perceived by pharmacists. There was an increase in remote working, although most participants continued to have a physical presence within general practices. Face-to-face interactions with patients reduced, which was negatively perceived by participants, and telephone consults were considered efficient yet less effective. Professional development activities were challenged by increased workloads and reduced support available. Although workplace stress was apparent, there was no indication of widespread job dissatisfaction. CONCLUSION: The pandemic has impacted pharmacists and technicians, but it is unknown if changes will be permanent, and there is a need to understand which changes should continue. Future research should explore the impact of altered service delivery, including remote working, on patient care.

Development of a primary care pharmacy outcomes framework: An umbrella literature review.

BACKGROUND: An aging population and rising multi-morbidity has shifted healthcare provision from secondary to primary care. Pharmacy-led services have been introduced to support this. The development of an outcomes framework for these services would facilitate conclusions to be drawn on their effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: To identify outcomes used to evaluate pharmacy-led medication therapy and disease management services within primary care settings to develop an outcomes framework for future studies. METHODS: An umbrella literature review was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and PsycINFO were searched in June 2020 to identify relevant articles. Eligible reviews were those including studies published from 2010 onwards which reported on the outcomes of pharmacy-led medication therapy and disease management services within primary care, excluding community pharmacy settings. Data were extracted and a content analysis, guided by the ECHO model, stratified the outcomes into four areas: economic, clinical, humanistic and service. RESULTS: Twenty-four reviews covering 52 unique studies were identified. Pharmacy-led services included: medication reviews (n=24, 46.2%), disease and therapy management (n=17, 32.7%), educational services (n=6, 11.5%), medicines reconciliation (n=3, 5.8%), and medication compliance support (n=1, 1.9%). Services were commonly targeted towards endocrine (n=23, 44.2%) or cardiovascular diseases (n=20, 38.5%). Outcomes most commonly explored were clinical (n=38, 73.1%) and service outcomes (n=37, 71.2%), followed by humanistic (n=23, 44.2%) and economic outcomes (n=13, 25.0%). Overall, 17 sub-categories of outcomes were identified; common sub-categories were: disease indicators [clinical]; medication use and healthcare utilisation [service]; adherence to medicines [humanistic]; and healthcare costs [economic]. CONCLUSIONS: The findings informed the development of an outcomes framework to guide the evaluation of medication therapy and disease management services, and facilitate international standardised outcome measures within primary care pharmacy to be developed. This could help offer vital evidence on the effectiveness of these services to ensure the pharmacy workforce is working optimally to support primary care.

Implementation of pharmacist-led services in primary care: A mixed-methods exploration of pharmacists' perceptions of a national educational resource package.

BACKGROUND: To help alleviate the global pressure on primary care, there has been an increase in the number of clinical pharmacists within primary care. Educational resources are necessary to support this workforce and their development within this role. An educational resource package was developed in Scotland to support the General Practice Clinical Pharmacists (GPCPs), containing a hard copy Competency and Capability Framework (CCF), an online platform (TURAS) and both clinical and educational supervisors in 2016. OBJECTIVE: To examine the implementation of a competency-based educational resource package through the exploration of pharmacists' perceptions of its adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. METHODS: Participants were GPCPs who had been part of a national training event between 2016 and 2018. The participants were given the opportunity to complete an online questionnaire or a semi-structured telephone interview. Both data collection tools were based on Proctor's model of implementation outcomes: adoption, acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. Areas covered included GPCPs' perceptions and level of adoption of the educational resource package developed to support them in their role. RESULTS: Of a potential 164 participants, 52 (31.7%) completed the questionnaire and 12 (7.3%) completed the interview. GPCPs indicated widespread adoption and were accepting of the resources; however, it was suggested that its value was undermined, as it was not associated with a qualification. The appropriateness and feasibility of the resources depended on GPCPs' individual situation (including current role, previous job experience, time available, support received from peers and supervisors, and perceptions of resources available). CONCLUSIONS: The suitability of the CCF was evidenced by participants' adoption and acceptance of the resource, indicating the necessity of a competence-based framework to support the GPCPs' role. However, its suitability was hindered in terms of varied perceptions of appropriateness and feasibility. Despite the limited sample size, the results indicate that the value of these resources should be promoted across primary care; nevertheless further facilitation is required to allow GPCPs to fully engage with the resources.

Implementation of pharmacist-led services in primary care: A mixed-methods exploration of pharmacists’ perceptions of a national educational resource package

Background: To help alleviate the global pressure on primary care, there has been an increase in the number of clinical pharmacists within primary care. Educational resources are necessary to support this workforce and their development within this role. An educational resource package was developed in Scotland to support the General Practice Clinical Pharmacists (GPCPs), containing a hard copy Competency and Capability Framework (CCF), an online platform (TURAS) and both clinical and educational supervisors in 2016. Objective: To examine the implementation of a competency-based educational resource package through the exploration of pharmacists’ perceptions of its adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Methods: Participants were GPCPs who had been part of a national training event between 2016 and 2018. The participants were given the opportunity to complete an online questionnaire or a semi-structured telephone interview. Both data collection tools were based on Proctor’s model of implementation outcomes: adoption, acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. Areas covered included GPCPs’ perceptions and level of adoption of the educational resource package developed to support them in their role. Results: Of a potential 164 participants, 52 (31.7%) completed the questionnaire and 12 (7.3%) completed the interview. GPCPs indicated widespread adoption and were accepting of the resources; however, it was suggested that its value was undermined, as it was not associated with a qualification. The appropriateness and feasibility of the resources depended on GPCPs’ individual situation (including current role, previous job experience, time available, support received from peers and supervisors, and perceptions of resources available) (AU)

Competencies required for General Practice Clinical Pharmacists providing the Scottish Pharmacotherapy Service: A modified eDelphi study.

Due to work load pressures in primary care, increasing efforts are being made internationally to implement pharmacists working alongside general practitioners. While there is wide interest in the contributions pharmacists can make within primary care, there is limited research which explores the competencies pharmacists need to safely and effectively provide care in this arena. Therefore, a modified eDelphi study was conducted between July 2019 and January 2020 among pharmacists working in General Practice in Scotland in order to (a) generate a list of competencies required to undertake pharmacotherapy tasks within General Practice using content analysis; and (b) establish consensus regarding the importance of these competencies using a rating scale ranging from 1 ("not important") to 10 ("very important"). A framework of competencies was developed, containing eight competency categories with a total of 31 individual competency items. Overall, study participants considered all eight competency categories as being important, with a mode of 10 and a median >8; agreement among participants was high, with the majority of individual competency items rated 8 or above by more than 75% of participants. There was, however, variation in responses with regards to specific tasks such as medicines reconciliation and medication compliance reviews. Findings indicate that the GP setting requires a broad set of competencies-covering areas including the use of IT systems; clinical knowledge; and communicating with patients and other healthcare professionals. This implies that further emphasis on clinical and consultation skills should be added to training programmes aimed at GP pharmacists; furthermore, ongoing support is also needed with regards to generic skills such as the use of IT systems, documentation, and general procedures and processes within primary care, some of which might need to be tailored to the specific practice context.

A literature review of human factors and ergonomics within the pharmacy dispensing process.

BACKGROUND: Within healthcare, Human Factors explores the fit between people and their working environment to improve safety, performance and wellbeing. The pharmacy setting is an area of particular interest considering the high-risk nature of the work activities in relation to dispensing errors. Internationally, the pharmacy setting is experiencing significant workforce changes, including the introduction of pharmacy technicians performing accuracy checks, and the adoption of novel technologies such as automated dispensing. OBJECTIVE: A literature review was conducted to identify studies which have explored the pharmacy dispensing process from a Human Factors perspective. METHODS: The databases Medline, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched on the 27th of November 2018. All study designs were eligible for inclusion from community and hospital settings. Key study findings were extracted and reported using a descriptive narrative synthesis method. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were identified, with most published from 2010 onwards. The review identified that a myriad of aspects influence safety within the dispensing process; that the dispensing process is complex in nature and can be depicted in many different ways; and lastly, that deviations from intended practice appear commonplace. Most studies used two or more data collection sources, and various theories, models and frameworks were applied. Although the focus of all studies was within the wider domain of Human Factors, 14 studies did not explicitly refer to a Human Factors approach within the manuscript. CONCLUSIONS: The complexity of the pharmacy dispensing setting suggests that adopting a Human Factors approach to explore this context is appropriate. Future Human Factors research should explore the implementation of new technology and services and focus on obtaining empirical evidence that adopting a Human Factors approach improves safety and/or efficiency within pharmacy practice. Clear guidance on how to apply the range of Human Factors approaches would help support such research and facilitate the development of sound theory.

A cross-sectional survey of the pharmacy workforce in general practice in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: In Scotland, there has been significant investment in pharmacy teams in general medical practices over recent years, aligned to current government policy. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the national pharmacy workforce including activities undertaken, perceived competence and confidence, as well as perception of integration of the intervention. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of all pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in general practices. Survey items were demographics, activities undertaken and experiences. The NoMAD tool (Improving the Normalization of Complex Interventions) was included as a measure of perspectives of implementation. Post-piloting, a questionnaire link was sent to all pharmacists (n = 471) and pharmacy technicians (n = 112). A total NoMAD score was obtained by assigning 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) to each item. RESULTS: Responses were received from 393 (83.4%) pharmacists and 101 (91.8%) pharmacy technicians. Three quarters of pharmacists (74.6%) and pharmacy technicians (73.3%) had been qualified for over 10 years. Two-thirds of pharmacists (68.4%) were independent prescribers, with three quarters (72.3%) currently prescribing. Respondents worked in a median of two practices and were providing a range of activities including medication/polypharmacy reviews, medicines reconciliation, prescribing efficiencies and training. Respondents reported high levels of competence and confidence (median 8, scale 0-10 highest). Median NoMAD total score (scale 20-100 highest, Cronbach's alpha 0.89) was 80 for pharmacists and 75 for pharmacy technicians, P ≤ 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The general practice pharmacy workforce in Scotland is experienced, well-qualified and integrated within general practices, delivering a range of activities. These findings have implications for workforce planning and future education and training.

Factors influencing national implementation of innovations within community pharmacy: a systematic review applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: To meet emergent healthcare needs, innovations need to be implemented into routine clinical practice. Community pharmacy is increasingly considered a setting through which innovations can be implemented to achieve positive service and clinical outcomes. Small-scale pilot programmes often need scaled up nation-wide to affect population level change. This systematic review aims to identify facilitators and barriers to the national implementation of community pharmacy innovations. METHODS: A systematic review exploring pharmacy staff perspectives of the barriers and facilitators to implementing innovations at a national level was conducted. The databases Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Open Grey were searched and supplemented with additional search mechanisms such as Zetoc alerts. Eligible studies underwent quality assessment, and a directed content analysis approach to data extraction was conducted and aligned to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to facilitate narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies were included: 16 were qualitative, 21 applied a questionnaire design, and 2 were mixed methods. Overarching thematic areas spanning across the CFIR domains were pharmacy staff engagement (e.g. their positive and negative perceptions), operationalisation of innovations (e.g. insufficient resources and training), and external engagement (e.g. the perceptions of patients and other healthcare professionals, and their relationship with the community pharmacy). Study participants commonly suggested improvements in the training offered, in the engagement strategies adopted, and in the design and quality of innovations. CONCLUSIONS: This study's focus on national innovations resulted in high-level recommendations to facilitate the development of successful national implementation strategies. These include (1) more robust piloting of innovations, (2) improved engagement strategies to increase awareness and acceptance of innovations, (3) promoting whole-team involvement within pharmacies to overcome time constraints, and (4) sufficient pre-implementation evaluation to gauge acceptance and appropriateness of innovations within real-world settings. The findings highlight the international challenge of balancing the professional, clinical, and commercial obligations within community pharmacy practice. A preliminary theory of how salient factors influence national implementation in the community pharmacy setting has been developed, with further research necessary to understand how the influence of these factors may differ within varying contexts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: A protocol for this systematic review was developed and uploaded onto the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews database (Registration number: CRD42016038876 ).

Application of process mapping to understand integration of high risk medicine care bundles within community pharmacy practice.

OBJECTIVE: The Scottish Patient Safety Programme - Pharmacy in Primary Care collaborative is a quality improvement initiative adopting the Institute of Healthcare Improvement Breakthrough Series collaborative approach. The programme developed and piloted High Risk Medicine (HRM) Care Bundles (CB), focused on warfarin and non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs), within 27 community pharmacies over 4 NHS Regions. Each CB involves clinical assessment and patient education, although the CB content varies between regions. To support national implementation, this study aims to understand how the pilot pharmacies integrated the HRM CBs into routine practice to inform the development of a generic HRM CB process map. METHODS: Regional process maps were developed in 4 pharmacies through simulation of the CB process, staff interviews and documentation of resources. Commonalities were collated to develop a process map for each HRM, which were used to explore variation at a national event. A single, generic process map was developed which underwent validation by case study testing. RESULTS: The findings allowed development of a generic process map applicable to warfarin and NSAID CB implementation. Five steps were identified as required for successful CB delivery: patient identification; clinical assessment; pharmacy CB prompt; CB delivery; and documentation. The generic HRM CB process map encompasses the staff and patients' journey and the CB's integration into routine community pharmacy practice. Pharmacist involvement was required only for clinical assessment, indicating suitability for whole-team involvement. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding CB integration into routine practice has positive implications for successful implementation. The generic process map can be used to develop targeted resources, and/or be disseminated to facilitate CB delivery and foster whole team involvement. Similar methods could be utilised within other settings, to allow those developing novel services to distil the key processes and consider their integration within routine workflows to effect maximal, efficient implementation and benefit to patient care.

A qualitative study of the relationship between the Scottish Medicines Consortium and their clinical experts.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Internationally, health technology assessments (HTAs) are ubiquitous drivers to health policy. Within Scotland, the Scottish Medicines Consortium undertakes the medicine review process. Input from clinical experts, involved in frontline care, is an integral component of the assessment process. This paper explores the relationship between the clinical experts and the HTA agency within Scotland to better understand what motivates expert clinicians to devote their time to the medicine review process with no remuneration. METHODS: Twenty-seven clinical experts from 16 different clinical specialties took part in one-to-one interviews at their place of work between October 2011 and March 2012. Data analysis was inductive and comprised the organization of data into a framework and a subsequent thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three distinct themes were identified: (1) recruitment, which identified two types of explanations for the experts' appointment: external justification (nominated by another) and internal justification (being recognized as an expert); (2) flexibility of the procedures, with experts able to determine their own response style and negotiate timelines; (3) health care systems, demonstrating that their affiliation to the health system underpinned the relationship and their motivation to be clinical experts. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide insight into the elements important to clinicians who voluntarily contribute to HTA processes. Examination of these elements in the context of the organizational citizenship behavior literature provides a foundation on which to improve understanding of this relationship and sustain and improve clinical expert participation in an increasingly intensified clinical environment and within cash-limited HTA systems.

Development and psychometric testing of an instrument to measure safety climate perceptions in community pharmacy.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: A positive and strong safety culture underpins effective learning from patient safety incidents in health care, including the community pharmacy (CP) setting. To build this culture, perceptions of safety climate must be measured with context-specific and reliable instruments. No pre-existing instruments were specifically designed or suitable for CP within Scotland. We therefore aimed to develop a psychometrically sound instrument to measure perceptions of safety climate within Scottish CPs. METHODS: The first stage, development of a preliminary instrument, comprised three steps: (i) a literature review; (ii) focus group feedback; and (iii) content validation. The second stage, psychometric testing, consisted of three further steps: (iv) a pilot survey; (v) a survey of all CP staff within a single health board in NHS Scotland; and (vi) application of statistical methods, including principal components analysis and calculation of Cronbach's reliability coefficients, to derive the final instrument. RESULTS: The preliminary questionnaire was developed through a process of literature review and feedback. This questionnaire was completed by staff in 50 CPs from the 131 (38%) sampled. 250 completed questionnaires were suitable for analysis. Psychometric evaluation resulted in a 30-item instrument with five positively correlated safety climate factors: leadership, teamwork, safety systems, communication and working conditions. Reliability coefficients were satisfactory for the safety climate factors (α > 0.7) and overall (α = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: The robust nature of the technical design and testing process has resulted in the development of an instrument with sufficient psychometric properties, which can be implemented in the community pharmacy setting in NHS Scotland.

Planned and unplanned discharge from alcohol services in Scotland, 2004-2008.

AIMS: Available data suggests that the rate of unplanned discharge from alcohol treatment services is an international problem reflective, perhaps, of ambivalence surrounding treatment in general. Given Scotland's escalating prevalence of alcohol misuse, a preliminary study of Scottish dropout rates would make a useful contribution to the international scene. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of discharge statuses (planned/unplanned/disciplinary) of entries to alcohol treatment services between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2008 was conducted on data provided by 10 regional Drug and Alcohol Action Teams (DAATs) and three individual treatment providers. RESULTS: Of 48,299 cases, 52.23% (n = 25,231) were unplanned discharges. Data showed a general increasing trend in the rate of planned discharges across the examined 4-year period, from 41.66% in 2004-2005 to 51.94% in 2007-2008. Inspection of the data revealed marked regional variations in ratios of planned to unplanned discharge, with only four of the 10 regions examined reporting a planned discharge rate >50%. CONCLUSION: More than one of every two entries to alcohol misuse services between 2004 and 2008 resulted in an unplanned discharge. The trend of improvement over the examined 4-year period was not consistent for all regions. A comparison of this figure with available US and Welsh data is made. The importance of these data in assessing the cost-effectiveness of alcohol treatment services and implications for policy making is discussed.