Community pharmacists' attitudes towards checking prescriptions: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The final prescription check is a mandatory but time-consuming process in Dutch community pharmacies. A safer dispensing process may have made the final prescription check obsolete. OBJECTIVE: To describe the final prescription check in Dutch community pharmacies and explore pharmacists' attitudes towards changing this. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch community pharmacists. The online questionnaire was based on literature and previous qualitative research, piloted in three pharmacies, and took 10 min to complete. Results were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 409 pharmacists participated. They saw the final prescription check as an important quality assurance of the dispensing process. Nevertheless, most pharmacists agreed that the final prescription check could be optimized as they thought that the time invested outweighed the benefits. Automation of the dispensing process, only checking selected high-risk prescriptions, and more in-process checks could reduce the need for an extensive final prescription check, rather than delegating the task to assistants. To implement changes, most pharmacists felt current dispensing guidelines needed to be adapted. CONCLUSION: There was a widespread consensus that optimizing the final prescription check could enhance efficiency and allow more time for person-centred care. Most pharmacists expressed a preference for updated guidelines before implementing such changes.

Pharmacists combating antimicrobial resistance: A Delphi study on antibiotic dispensing.

BACKGROUND: The daily work of community pharmacists includes dispensing antibiotics, but little is known about how this should be done to ensure quality use of antibiotics. OBJECTIVE: To define specific tasks of the community pharmacist when dispensing antibiotics and to assess to what extent these tasks can be implemented in practice in Europe. METHODS: A Delphi study with community pharmacist experts in the European Economic Area. Statements on potential tasks for pharmacists during the antibiotic dispensing process were based on a systematic literature review. Participants rated the statements for importance and feasibility of implementation in practice in 3 rounds on a scale from 1 to 9. Consensus of importance was defined as ≥ 80 % of experts rating a statement between 7 and 9. An online expert meeting was conducted between rounds 1 and 2. Scores for all statements were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Overall, 38 experts from 21 countries participated in the study. Experts reached consensus on 108 statements within 5 themes: 1) collaboration with prescribers, 2) checking prescriptions and dispensing, 3) counselling, 4) education, and 5) pharmacy services. Potential tasks included advising and collaborating with prescribers, performing safety checks, and having access to specific prescription information. Additionally, pharmacists should counsel patients related to the dispensed antibiotic and on antimicrobial resistance and infectious diseases. With few exceptions, pharmacists should not dispense antibiotics without prescriptions or prescribe antibiotics. Consensus on feasibility of implementation was only reached for statements in the categories "counselling patients" and "education". Barriers to changing practice included structure of the healthcare system, resistance to change from prescribers or pharmacy staff, lack of time and finances, legal barriers, and patient expectations. CONCLUSION: Community pharmacists have an important role when dispensing antibiotics. This study provides important steps towards better community pharmacy antibiotic dispensing practices throughout the EEA.

One Health Determinants of Escherichia coli Antimicrobial Resistance in Humans in the Community: An Umbrella Review.

To date, the scientific literature on health variables for Escherichia coli antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has been investigated throughout several systematic reviews, often with a focus on only one aspect of the One Health variables: human, animal, or environment. The aim of this umbrella review is to conduct a systematic synthesis of existing evidence on Escherichia coli AMR in humans in the community from a One Health perspective. PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched on "antibiotic resistance" and "systematic review" from inception until 25 March 2022 (PROSPERO: CRD42022316431). The methodological quality was assessed, and the importance of identified variables was tabulated across all included reviews. Twenty-three reviews were included in this study, covering 860 primary studies. All reviews were of (critically) low quality. Most reviews focused on humans (20), 3 on animals, and 1 on both human and environmental variables. Antibiotic use, urinary tract infections, diabetes, and international travel were identified as the most important human variables. Poultry farms and swimming in freshwater were identified as potential sources for AMR transmission from the animal and environmental perspectives. This umbrella review highlights a gap in high-quality literature investigating the time between variable exposure, AMR testing, and animal and environmental AMR variables.

Misconceptions and Knowledge Gaps on Antibiotic Use and Resistance in Four Healthcare Settings and Five European Countries-A Modified Delphi Study.

Misconceptions and knowledge gaps about antibiotics contribute to inappropriate antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance. This study aimed to identify and prioritize misconceptions and knowledge gaps about antibiotic use from a healthcare professionals' perspective. A modified Delphi study with a predefined list of statements, two questionnaire rounds, and an expert meeting was conducted. The statements were rated by healthcare professionals from France, Greece, Lithuania, Poland, and Spain, and from general practice, out-of-hour services, nursing homes, and pharmacies. A total of 44 pre-defined statements covered the following themes: (1) antimicrobial resistance in general, (2) use of antibiotics in general, (3) use of antibiotics for respiratory tract infections, and (4) use of antibiotics for urinary tract infections. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement between the professionals during the second Delphi round. For 30% of the statements, professionals from the four settings together reached consensus. In each setting individually, at least 50% of the statements reached consensus, indicating that there are still many misconceptions and knowledge gaps that need to be addressed. Six educational tools (leaflets, posters, checklists) were developed to address the knowledge gaps and misconceptions. These can be used by patients and healthcare professionals to improve the use of antibiotics in practice.

Community pharmacist-led interventions for patients with type 2 diabetes in low-income and middle-income countries: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Studies assessing community pharmacist-led interventions conducted in high-income countries indicate that community pharmacists are successful in taking opportunities to support diabetes management. It is not yet clear as to what extent this is also true for low-income and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the types of interventions performed by community pharmacists and available evidence about their effects on patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for (non) randomized controlled, before-and-after, and interrupted time series design studies. There was no restriction on publication language. Interventions to be included had to be delivered by community pharmacists in a primary care or community setting. Study quality was assessed using the National Institute of Health tools, with results analyzed qualitatively, and the review itself was conducted in accordance with guidelines for scoping reviews. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included, representing 4,434 patients (mean age from 47.4 to 59.5 years, 55.4% female) from community pharmacies (16 studies), primary care centers (8 studies) or community setting (4 studies). Four studies were single-component and the remaining represented multi-component interventions. Face-to-face counseling of patients was the most common intervention, often combined with the provision of printed materials, remote consultations, or conducting medication reviews. Generally, studies showed improved outcomes in the intervention group, including clinical, patient-reported and medication safety outcomes. In most studies, at least one domain was judged to be of poor quality, with heterogeneity among studies. CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacist-led interventions on type 2 diabetes mellitus patients showed various positive effects but the quality of the evidence was poor. Face-to-face counseling of varying intensity, often combined with other strategies and representing a multi-component intervention, was the most common type. Although these findings support the expansion of the community pharmacist's role in diabetes care in low-income and middle-income countries, better quality studies are needed to evaluate the impact of specific interventions.

Developing a Tool for Auditing the Quality of Antibiotic Dispensing in Community Pharmacies: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control describes the community pharmacist as the gatekeeper to the quality of antibiotic use. The pharmacist has the responsibility to guard safe and effective antibiotic use; however, little is known about how this is implemented in practice. AIMS: To assess the feasibility of a method to audit the quality of antibiotic dispensing in community pharmacy practice and to explore antibiotic dispensing practices in Greece, Lithuania, Poland, and Spain. METHODS: The Audit Project Odense methodology to audit antibiotic dispensing practice was adapted for use in community pharmacy practice. Community pharmacists registered antibiotic dispensing on a specifically developed registration chart and were asked to provide feedback on the registration method. RESULTS: Altogether, twenty pharmacists were recruited in four countries. They registered a total of 409 dispenses of oral antibiotics. Generally, pharmacists were positive about the feasibility of implementing the registration chart in practice. The frequency of checking for allergies, contraindications and interactions differed largely between the four countries. Pharmacists provided little advice to patients. The pharmacists rarely contacted prescribers. CONCLUSION: This tool seems to make it possible to get a useful picture of antibiotic dispensing patterns in community pharmacies. Dispensing practice does not seem to correspond with EU guidelines according to these preliminary results.

Health alliance for prudent prescribing and yield of antibiotics in a patient-centred perspective (HAPPY PATIENT): a before-and-after intervention and implementation study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Excessive and inappropriate use of antibiotics is the most important driver of antimicrobial resistance. The aim of the HAPPY PATIENT project is to evaluate the adaptation of European Union (EU) recommendations on the prudent use of antimicrobials in human health by evaluating the impact of a multifaceted intervention targeting different categories of healthcare professionals (HCPs) on common community-acquired infectious diseases, especially respiratory and urinary tract infections. METHODS/DESIGN: HAPPY PATIENT was initiated in January 2021 and is planned to end in December 2023. The partners of this project include 15 organizations from 9 countries. Diverse HCPs (doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and pharmacy technicians) will be audited by the Audit Project Odense (APO) method before and after an intervention in four different settings: general practice, out of hours services, nursing homes and community pharmacies in four high antibiotic prescribing countries (France, Poland, Greece, and Spain) and one low prescribing country (Lithuania). About 25 individuals from each professional group will be recruited in each country, who will register at least 25 patients with community-acquired infections during each audit period. Shortly before the second registration participants will undertake a multifaceted intervention and will receive the results from the first registration to allow the identification of possible quality problems. At these meetings participants will receive training courses on enhancement of communication skills, dissemination of clinical guidelines with recommendations for diagnosis and treatment, posters for the waiting rooms, and leaflets for patients. The results of the second registration will be compared with those obtained in the first audit. DISCUSSION: HAPPY PATIENT is an EU-funded project aimed at contributing to the battle against antibiotic resistance through improvement of the quality of management of common community-acquired infections based on interventions by different types of HCPs. It is hypothesized that the use of multifaceted strategies combining active intervention will be effective in reducing inappropriate prescribing and dispensing of antibiotics. STUDY REGISTRATION: EU Health programmes project database https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/chafea_pdb/health/projects/900024/summary ; date of registration: 1 January 2021.

Antibiotic Prescribing in Dutch Daytime and Out-of-Hours General Practice during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Database Study.

COVID-19 restrictions have resulted in major changes in healthcare, including the prescribing of antibiotics. We aimed to monitor antibiotic prescribing trends during the COVID-19 pandemic in Dutch general practice, both during daytime and out-of-hours (OOH). Routine care data were used from 379 daytime general practices (DGP) and 28 OOH-services over the period 2019-2021. Per week, we analyzed prescription rates per 100,000 inhabitants, overall, for respiratory and urinary tract infections (RTIs and UTIs) specifically and within age categories. We assessed changes in antibiotic prescribing during different phases of the pandemic using interrupted time series analyses. Both at DGPs and OOH-services significantly fewer antibiotics were prescribed during the COVID-19 pandemic after government measures became effective. Furthermore, the number of contacts decreased in both settings. When restrictions were revoked in 2021 prescription rates increased both at DGP and OOH-services, returning to pre-pandemic levels at OOH-services, but not in DGP. Changes in antibiotic prescribing rates were prominent for RTIs and among children up to 11 years old, but not for UTIs. To conclude, while antibiotic prescribing decreased during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic both in daytime and out-of-hours, the pandemic does not seem to have a lasting effect on antibiotic prescribing.

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of community pharmacist-led interventions to optimise the use of antibiotics.

AIMS: The aim of this systematic review is to assess the effects of community pharmacist-led interventions to optimise the use of antibiotics and identify which interventions are most effective. METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42020188552). PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for (randomised) controlled trials. Included interventions were required to target antibiotic use, be set in the community pharmacy context, and be pharmacist-led. Primary outcomes were quality of antibiotic supply and adverse effects while secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the 'Cochrane suggested risk of bias criteria' and narrative synthesis of primary outcomes conducted. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included covering in total 3822 patients (mean age 45.6 years, 61.9% female). Most studies used educational interventions. Three studies reported on primary outcomes, 12 on secondary outcomes and two on both. Three studies reported improvements in quality of dispensing, interventions led to more intensive symptom assessment (up to 30% more advice given) and a reduction of over-the-counter supply up to 53%. Three studies led to higher consumer satisfaction, effects on adherence from nine studies were mixed (risk difference 0.04 [-0.02, 0.10]). All studies had unclear or high risks of bias across at least one domain, with large heterogeneity between studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests some positive results from pharmacist-led interventions, but the interventions do not seem sufficiently effective as currently implemented. This review should be interpreted as exploratory research, as more high-quality research is needed.