RPS Conference 2010, Abstracts 2010 - Royal Pharmaceutical Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

factory. They believed that because a medicine made by a Pharmacist is for an individual, specific patient that would work better and be safer. Finally, the participating children were strongly of the opinion that, in affairs like this, we need to take their views into account and involve them in making decisions about the medicines they receive. Conclusions: This research is providing clear evidence that children as young as eight years old are able to understand the role of the Pharmacist in preparing medicines extemporaneously for sick children and issues which surround this. This study provides a benchmark for further exploratory research in this area. References: 1. Bearison, D. They never want to tell you: Children talk about cancer. Cambridge: Harvard University Press 1991 2. Donnelly, R. Is extemporaneous dispensing really in the best interest of patients? <strong>Pharmaceutical</strong> Journal 2008 280:251-254 . 3. Waksler, R. Studying children: Phenomenological insights. Human Studies.1986, 9, 71-92. 4. Bibace, R. & Walsh, M. Development of children's concepts of illness. Pediatrics1980, 66: 912-7.
19 Exploring patient opinions of MURs Salma Iqbal, Kay Wood Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom Focal Points • Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 patients to explore their opinions of MURs. • Generally the patients state that MURs are useful, but they are often unable to recall the pharmacists’ recommendations and some do not understand the service despite it being in place since 2005. • Explanation of the service is obviously still necessary and needs to be improved along with maintaining the relationship between individual pharmacists and patients. Introduction There have been few published studies regarding patients’ views of Medicine Use Reviews (MURs), 1-3, even though the MUR service has grown over the past five years, with over one million being completed in England within the last financial year. 4 Method Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted in February <strong>2010</strong> with 23 patients who had a MUR within the previous four weeks. Patients were randomly selected from four branches of a large multiple community pharmacy chain located within a city in the East Midlands. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and content analysed. As part of the interview patients were asked about the recommendations made to them during the MUR. This was then compared with the number of recommendations recorded by the community pharmacist. Ethics committee approval was not sought as this is a service evaluation. Results All patients who were contacted by telephone agreed to be interviewed (n = 23). Thirteen patients said they found the MUR beneficial and they were more informed about their medication as a result of the MUR. A further 5 patients said the MUR was reassuring as it confirmed existing knowledge of their medicines. Seven patients stated they had a poor or minimal relationship with their GP, of whom 4 thought the MUR was useful: ‘I feel more comfortable with the pharmacist because they know me’. However, only 3 patients could recall all the recommendations made by the pharmacist. Eight patients did not appear to understand the purpose of an MUR; some thought it was legal requirement, whilst others thought it was for the benefit of the pharmacy not themselves. However, all but 2 of the patients interviewed said they would have another MUR the following year. Although no-one expressed concern that they were being overheard, 8 patients thought the consultation room was too small: ‘… it was an intimate sized room.’; ‘claustrophobic’. Conclusions Patient reports that MURs are beneficial was less evident in this study than in previous patient studies. 1-3 The method used may have allowed patients to be more honest as the interviewer
Page 1 and 2: 1 Cost effectiveness of community p
Page 3 and 4: 2 The Diabetes Pilot Program: Barri
Page 5 and 6: 3 The PINCER trial: a cluster rando
Page 7 and 8: 4 How pharmacists working on the PI
Page 9 and 10: 5 A systematic review of weight man
Page 11 and 12: 6 An exploration of the potential i
Page 13 and 14: 7 An Exploration of Nursing Home Ma
Page 15 and 16: 8 Unintended discrepancies between
Page 17 and 18: 9 Unlicensed Medicines: Risk and Re
Page 19 and 20: 10 Audit of Discharge Summaries in
Page 21 and 22: 11 Over-the-counter simvastatin: co
Page 23 and 24: 12 A qualitative study of disadvant
Page 25 and 26: 13 Pharmacist prescribing in North
Page 27 and 28: 14 Pharmacist prescribing in primar
Page 29 and 30: 15 Training undergraduate pharmacy
Page 31 and 32: 16 ‘You’re an agent unto yourse
Page 33 and 34: 17 Information for young people wit
Page 35: 18 The Role of the Pharmacist and E
Page 39 and 40: 20 Why do patients accept or declin
Page 41 and 42: 21 Further investigations on GP pre
Page 43 and 44: 22 The HAPPY trial: a randomised co
Page 45 and 46: 23 The effects of numeracy on the p
Page 47 and 48: 24 Translation and evaluation of
Page 49 and 50: 25 Influence of relationships, trus
Page 51 and 52: 26 Title: Pharmacists’ well being
Page 53 and 54: 27 What do newly qualified pharmaci
Page 55 and 56: 28 Does learning the “pure” sci
Page 57 and 58: 29 Defining and identifying perform
Page 59 and 60: 30 Engendering and Appraising ‘Pr
Page 61 and 62: 31 Inappropriate prescribing of Opi
Page 63 and 64: 32 Developing a five-year curriculu
Page 65 and 66: 33 An Investigation of the incidenc
Page 67 and 68: 34 Analysing medicine wastage in th
Page 69 and 70: 35 A Clinical Audit on the Use of A
Page 71 and 72: 36 A Clinical Audit on Reporting an
Page 73 and 74: 37 Assessment of hypertension care
Page 75 and 76: 38 Community pharmacy EHC services:
Page 77 and 78: 39 The Impact of the Lloyds Pharmac
Page 79 and 80: 40 Medication and handover incident
Page 81 and 82: 41 The time-scale for delivery of p
Page 83 and 84: 42 Medication access in primary car
Page 85 and 86: 43 A solution to improving uptake o
Page 87 and 88:
44 Medicines Information to Support
Page 89 and 90:
45 Are pharmacist public health pra
Page 91 and 92:
46 Anticoagulation for haemofiltrat
Page 93 and 94:
47 Med Wreck: An Audit of Communica
Page 95 and 96:
48 Pandemic flu preparedness: Plann
Page 97 and 98:
49 Young people's views about chlam
Page 99 and 100:
50 Psychotropic use in elderly pati
Page 101 and 102:
51 Using simulation of community ph
Page 103 and 104:
52 ‘Pharmacists in Schools’: De
Page 105 and 106:
53 What do Pharmacists in Surrey wa
Page 107 and 108:
54 Has the new audit module in the
Page 109 and 110:
55 Introduction of a Nursing Home B
Page 111 and 112:
56 An audit of Benzodiazepine presc
Page 113 and 114:
57 Improving patient safety through
Page 115 and 116:
58 Video clips enhance student lear
Page 117 and 118:
59 Do preregistration trainee pharm
Page 119 and 120:
60 An investigation of the views of
Page 121 and 122:
61 Ensuring accuracy in routinely c
Page 123 and 124:
62 Deprivation status and utilizati
Page 125 and 126:
63 Exploring Reasons, Factors and A
Page 127 and 128:
64 I’m off to the gym: Exploring
Page 129 and 130:
65 Is there alignment between the v
Page 131 and 132:
66 The views of out-patients with c
Page 133 and 134:
67 Patient Experiences of Living wi
Page 135 and 136:
68 Clinical management and cost of
Page 137 and 138:
69 Medicines Use Reviews - how have
Page 139 and 140:
70 How are pharmacists, registered
Page 141 and 142:
71 Barriers facing hypertensive pat
Page 143 and 144:
72 Developing an RCT of general pra
Page 145 and 146:
73 User and Staff Perspectives of C
Page 147 and 148:
74 Impact of pandemic influenza A/H
Page 149 and 150:
75 How do patients with osteoporosi
Page 151 and 152:
76 Integrating tuberculosis and dia
Page 153 and 154:
77 Improving outcomes and quality o
Page 155 and 156:
78 The uncertain future: a pilot st
Page 157 and 158:
79 Linkage of routinely collected N
Page 159 and 160:
80 Impact of Formative Assessment o
Page 161 and 162:
81 The prevalence of pharmacists’
Page 163 and 164:
82 A comparative study of prescribi
Page 165 and 166:
83 Evaluation of patient informatio
Page 167 and 168:
84 Patient medication adherence: a
Page 169 and 170:
85 Fitness to practise: pharmacists
Page 171 and 172:
86 Measurement of empathy levels in
Page 173 and 174:
87 Benzyl Alcohol Exposure from Hep
Page 175 and 176:
88 Neonatal gentamicin infusions- W
Page 177 and 178:
89 Unlicensed and off-label use of
Page 179 and 180:
90 Unlicensed and off-label prescri
Page 181 and 182:
91 Exploring community pharmacists
Page 183 and 184:
92 Investigation into Rapid Microbi
Page 185 and 186:
93 Pharmacy prescribing in XXXX-a q
Page 187 and 188:
94 Pharmacy prescribing in XXXX-a q
Page 189 and 190:
95 MEDICINE RELATED PROBLEMS IN SOU
Page 191 and 192:
96 Stability of pharmaceutical prod
Page 193 and 194:
97 The experiences of Malaysian pha
Page 195 and 196:
98 Medication management in older p
Page 197 and 198:
99 Adherence with calcium and vitam
Page 199 and 200:
100 Appraisal systems within commun
Page 201 and 202:
101 The clinical impact of a fractu
Page 203 and 204:
102 An audit of primary care prescr
Page 205 and 206:
103 Views of the public on over-the
show all

RPS Conference 2010, Abstracts 2010 - Royal Pharmaceutical Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?