RPS Conference 2010, Abstracts 2010 - Royal Pharmaceutical Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

way she was offered the MUR. She did not want an ‘extra layer’ of involvement and was content with advice from her doctor. Conclusions Patients appeared to accept an invitation for MURs because they feel obligated and are willing to help the pharmacist, but agree only if they have time. Their response does not seem to be strongly motivated by self interest or the prospect of personal benefit. Patients gave pragmatic reasons for declining. However, these were subsequently revealed to be convenient ‘excuses’, and hid what might have been construed as less acceptable or more complex motives. This was a small sample and the findings are therefore preliminary. However, patients’ underlying reasons for declining an MUR appear to be complex. This requires further investigation and consideration in future service evaluation. References 1. Department of Health. The <strong>Pharmaceutical</strong> Services (Advanced and Enhanced Services) (England) Directions. London: Department of Health; 2005. 2. Bassi M, Wood K. Medicines use reviews: time for a new name? Int J Pharm Pract 2009; 17 (Suppl. 2): B4- B5. 3. Urban R, Rivers P, Morgan J. Perceptions of medicines use reviews — the views of community pharmacists within a West Yorkshire primary care trust. Pharm J 2008; 281:303-305.
21 Further investigations on GP prescribing and patient compliance of steroid inhalers for Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients within a PCT in North West England Ian Cubbin, Andy McAlavey, Burns Wong Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom Focal Points • Assessing patient’s usage of steroid inhalers dependent on the frequency of prescriptions and their dosing regimen • Approximately 12% of patients on a steroid inhaler in the study comply with their inhaler prescription (+/- 10%) • Compliance to steroid inhaler is poor, improved patient education is necessary to extend therapeutic value Introduction The use of inhaled steroid is an integral part in the treatment of asthma (BTS guidelines Step 2 and onwards) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Daily administration of inhaled steroid acts as prevention to the exacerbation of attacks associated with the two airway diseases 1 . Steroid inhalers accounted for over 577 million prescriptions in 2008, equivalent to 60.5% of the total Chapter 3 prescribing of the BNF 2 . This study investigated the trend in compliance of these inhalers and discusses implications following previous work by Marsden focusing on the same population 3 . The prescribing of Beclomethasone, the most common steroid prescribed is discussed; and Seretide® is compared with Symbicort®, the only steroid inhalers licensed in COPD 4 . Method The target population consisted of 87490 patients from 13 surgeries within the Primary Care Trust (PCT). Computerised patient records of subjects with asthma or COPD prescribed a steroid inhaler in 2009 were interrogated. The dates of the 3 most recent prescriptions were recorded to determine the frequency and duration of the treatment according to the patients dosing regimen. Compliance was calculated and potential discrepancies checked within the patient history. Results The total number of patients prescribed a steroid inhaler in 2009 was 3943 compared to 4524 in 2008 (13% reduction); .partly accounted for by refinement of the tool and the removal of patients prescribed for seasonal use. 3250 of the 3943 patients were prescribed 3 or more times. 82 patients received ‘as directed’ dosing and were excluded. The compliance results accounted from the remaining 3168 patients. Only 370 patients (11.7%) of the 3168 complied with a 90-110% usage range of their inhalers compared with 773 patients (33%) last year. The number of patients over-using their inhalers rose significantly this year. Interrogation of prescribing patterns suggested alignment with 28 or 56 day ordering for oral drugs, and increase in Smart prescribing which distorted the figures for Symbicort®. The decrease in compliance of over 20% of the population was accounted for by both over and under usage, the seasonal users having high compliance rates, and now excluded.
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 and 36: 18 The Role of the Pharmacist and E
Page 37 and 38: 19 Exploring patient opinions of MU
Page 39: 20 Why do patients accept or declin
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?