Antidepressants: A content analysis of healthcare providers' tweets.

Background: Antidepressants are the primary treatment for depression, and social support from social media may offer another support route. Whilst Twitter has become an interactive platform for healthcare providers and their patients, previous studies found low engagement of healthcare providers when discussing antidepressants on Twitter. This study aims to analyse the Twitter posts of healthcare providers related to antidepressants and to explore the healthcare providers' engagement and their areas of interest. Method: Tweets within a 10-day period were collected through multiple searches with a list of keywords within Twitter. The results were filtered against several inclusion criteria, including a manual screening to identify healthcare providers. A content analysis was conducted on eligible tweets where correlative themes and subthemes were identified. Key findings: Healthcare providers contributed 5.9% of the antidepressant-related tweets (n = 770/13,005). The major clinical topics referred to in the tweets were side effects, antidepressants for the treatment of COVID-19, and antidepressant studies of psychedelics. Nurses posted more tweets sharing personal experiences with commonly negative attitudes, in contrast to physicians. Links to external webpages were commonly used among healthcare providers, especially users representing healthcare organisations. Conclusions: A relatively low proportion of healthcare providers' engagement on Twitter regarding antidepressants (5.9%) was identified, with a minimal increase throughout the COVID-19 pandemic when compared to previous studies. The major clinical topics referred to in the tweets were side effects, antidepressants for the treatment of COVID-19 and antidepressant studies of psychedelics, which have been made publicly available. In general, the findings confirmed that social media platforms are a mechanism by which healthcare providers, organisations and students support patients, share information about adverse drug effects, communicate personal experiences, and share research. It is plausible that this could impact the belief and behaviours of people with lived experience of depression who may see these tweets.

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)

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.

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.