MEDICATION REVIEW OF CHILDREN ON LONG TERM MEDICATIONS: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2016 ◽  
Vol 101 (9) ◽  
pp. e2.42-e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Aston ◽  
Chi Huynh ◽  
Anthony Sinclair ◽  
Keith Wilson ◽  
David Terry

IntroductionChildren on long term medication may be under the care of more than one medical team including the patients GP. Children on chronic medication should be supported and their medications reviewed, especially in cases of polypharmacy. Medicines Use Reviews (MURs) were introduced into the pharmacy contract in 2005. The service was designed for community pharmacists to review patients on long term medication. The service specified that MURs were done on patients who can give consent and cannot be conducted with a parent or carer. Hence the service may be inaccessible to paediatric patients. This review aims to find studies that identify medication review services in primary care that cater for children on long term medication.MethodsA literature search was conducted on 6th June 2015 using the keywords, (“Medication” or “review” or “Medication Review” or “Medicines use review” or “Medication use review” or “New Medicine Service”) AND (“community pharmacy” OR “community pharmacist” OR “primary care” OR “General practice” OR “GP” OR “community paediatrician” OR “community pediatrician” OR “community nurse”). Bibliographic databases used were AMED, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, EMBASE, HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Health Business Elite. Inclusion criteria were: paediatric specific medication review in primary care, for example by either a GP, community paediatrician, community nurse or community pharmacist. Exclusion criteria were studies of medication review in adults/unclear patient age and secondary care medication reviews.ResultsFrom the 417 articles, 6 relevant articles were found after abstract and full text review. 235 articles were excluded after title and abstract review (11 did not have full text in English); 96 were adult or non-age specified medication review/MUR/New Medicine Service studies; 63 referred to observational, evaluative studies of interventions in adults; 6 were non-paediatric specific systematic reviews and 17 were protocols, commentaries, news, and letters.The 6 relevant articles consisted of 1 literature review (published 2004), 3 research articles and 1 published protocol. The literature review[1] recommended that children's long term medication should be reviewed. The published protocol stated that the NMS minimum age for inclusion in the trial was for children aged over 13 years of age. The four studies were related to psychiatrists reviewing paediatric mental health patients in the USA, a pharmacist using Drug Related Problem to review patients in GP practices in Australia, a UK study based on an information prescription concept by providing children dispensed medications in community pharmacy with signposting them to health information and one GP practice based study observing pharmaceutical care issues in children and adults.ConclusionThe results show that there are currently no known studies on medication use reviews specific to children, whereas in adults, published evaluations are available. The terms of the MUR policy restrict children's access to the service and so more studies are necessary to determine whether children could benefit from such access.

2018 ◽  
Vol 103 (2) ◽  
pp. e2.49-e2
Author(s):  
Jeff Aston

AimTo identify the experiences of community pharmacists in caring for children/young people, or their parents/carers, taking long-term medicines.MethodA pre-piloted 13 point semi-structured survey, participant information leaflet, consent form and pre-paid return envelope were posted to all 354 community pharmacists who had dispensed a prescription from a single specialist paediatric hospital during November and December 2015. Community pharmacy addresses were obtained from the National Health Service Business Services Authority ePACT system. Telephone follow-up of non-responders and, if necessary, a repeat mailing was made from 3 weeks after the original return by date.Participants were asked about their experiences of undertaking a medication review with either children/young people or their parents/carers, medication-related problems presenting to them, adherence, information needs of patients/carers and what issues were reported to them from this group.The data were analysed using SPSS version 22 and NVivo version 10.ResultsA response rate of 76/354 (21.5%) was achieved. Eighteen (23.7%) respondents had undertaken a Medicines Use Review (MUR),122 (28.9%) a New Medicines Service (NMS)2 review and 16 (21.1%) had undertaken another type of medication review in a child/young person. Respondents reported that patients or their carers had presented to them with adherence issues including stopping the medicine (24, 31.6%) and changing the dose (28, 36.8%) without informing the prescriber. Patients or their carers had requested information from them about the indication (59, 77.6%), dose regime (63, 82.9%), administration (64, 84.2%) and adverse effects (58, 76.6%). Respondents also reported patients/carers experiencing difficulties obtaining further supplies of a medicine from their community pharmacy (47, 61.8%) and patients’ general practitioners declining to prescribe a medicine recommended by the patient’s hospital-based specialist (27, 35.5%).ConclusionThis study has demonstrated that children, and their carers, taking long-term medicines experience a range of issues that they present to community pharmacists. Many of these issues would fall within the purview of currently funded medication review services namely the NMS and MUR.1,2 However, the proportion of pharmacists in this study undertaking formal medication review with children or their parents/carers was low. Further work is required to demonstrate the outcomes that such a review could have in this cohort of patients.ReferencesPharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee. MURs: The basics. What is the medicines use review and prescription intervention service? [Internet] 2016. Available from: MURs: The basics http://psnc.org.uk/services-commissioning/advanced-services/murs/murs-the-basics/ [Available: 19 May 2016].Pharmaceutical Services Negotiating Committee. New Medicines Service (NMS) [Internet] 2016. http://psnc.org.uk/services-commissioning/advanced-services/nms/ [Available: 19 May 2016].


Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 1339
Author(s):  
Cody K. Dukes ◽  
Elizabeth A. Sheaffer

Tracking adherence can be a useful means of identifying opportunities to provide educational intervention to nonadherent patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of biosensing technology to track medication adherence. Searches of PubMed and Ovid IPA were conducted. The criteria for inclusion were studies that tracked and reported ingestion events. Studies that did not track ingestion events were excluded from this review. Titles and abstracts were assessed for relevance, and full-text reviews were performed on all potentially relevant studies. References from the studies retrieved from the literature searches were assessed for additional applicable articles. Overall, ingestion events were detected 91.3% of the time, with many of the failed detections being related to patients not using or inappropriately using the system. In the studies that looked at the latency time, the overall mean time to detection by the wearable sensor was between 1.1 and 5.1 min. With medication nonadherence being a persistent problem in healthcare, biosensing technology presents an innovative approach to tracking adherence. The technology has been shown to be accurate in its ability to track actual medication use in patients. It has also been shown to detect ingestions with a minimal delay after administration. Accessibility may be an issue with this technology in the future, and further studies may be necessary to access the viability of biosensing technology.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 204512532110110
Author(s):  
Matej Stuhec ◽  
Lea Lah

Background: Mental disorders pose a significant clinical burden and affect approximately one-third of older adults. Although studies have shown positive impacts of clinical pharmacist (CP) interventions within the general population, the long-term effects of such cooperation on geropsychiatric patients in primary care settings are not yet known. This study evaluated whether CP interventions have a long-term impact on the quality of medication prescribing in geropsychiatric patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective non-interventional observational pre–post study for the 2015–2017 period, involving patients aged 65 or above for whom a medication review was provided by a CP. The study included participants with mental disorders treated with polypharmacy, including at least one psychotropic. Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in elderly patients were determined with the Priscus list, and potential type X drug–drug interactions (pXDDIs) with Lexicomp®. Up-to-date treatment guidelines were used to evaluate patient pharmacotherapy, and patient medication was evaluated before the initial medication review and again 6 months later. Results: The study included 48 patients (79.4 years, SD = 8.13) receiving a total of 558 medications (155 for the treatment of mental disorders). The number of medications decreased by 9.5% after the medication review. The CP proposed 198 interventions related to psychotropics, of which 108 (55%) were accepted by the general practitioners. All accepted (99.1%) interventions except one were still maintained 6 months after the interventions had been proposed. They led to a significant decrease in the total number of medications, PIMs, and pXDDIs ( p < 0.05), and improved treatment guidelines adherence. Conclusions: CP interventions decreased the number of medications, PIMs, and pXDDIs, and almost all interventions were maintained 6 months later. These results provide evidence for the positive effects of CP interventions in a primary care setting. Additional research with a larger sample size and a randomized study design is needed.


Author(s):  
Ejaz Cheema ◽  
Paul Sutcliffe ◽  
Donald Rj Singer

Objective: This study assessed the impact of the new medicine service (NMS) on medication use in patients starting a new medication for a long-term medical condition in the United Kingdom (UK). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in community pharmacies in the West Midlands area for three months from July to September 2012. The drug therapies/agents included in the study were antihypertensive, antidiabetics, anti-asthmatics and antiplatelet/anticoagulants.Results: 20 community pharmacists completed questionnaires related to 285 patients (160 female and 125 male). On the first NMS assessment, 82 patients reported drug-related problems including adverse effects and incorrect use of medications. Of these 82 patients, 58 received pharmacists' advice and 24 did not receive any advice. At the NMS follow up 39 (67%) of the 58 patients who received pharmacists' advice reported resolution of their drug-related problems while only four (17%) of the 24 patients who did not receive pharmacists' advice reported resolution of their problems (odds ratio 10.2, 95% CI 3.0-34.2 p<0.0001). The improvement in the correct use of medications by patients reported in this study for example by improving the inhaler technique of asthmatic patients is expected to have important implications for improving the healthcare outcome of patients with long-term conditions.Conclusion: This study provides support for the NMS as an opportunity to improve detection of adverse effects and improve the incorrect use of medicines by patients. Further research is needed to address the policy implications of the NMS, including analyses of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this service, and the sustainability of this form of pharmacist intervention in the long-term in clinical practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 286-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Ann Elliott ◽  
Matthew J Boyd ◽  
Lukasz Tanajewski ◽  
Nick Barber ◽  
Georgios Gkountouras ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the community pharmacy New Medicine Service (NMS) at 26 weeks.MethodsPragmatic patient-level parallel randomised controlled trial in 46 English community pharmacies. 504 participants aged ≥14, identified in the pharmacy when presenting a prescription for a new medicine for predefined long-term conditions, randomised to receive NMS (n=251) or normal practice (n=253) (NMS intervention: 2 consultations 1 and 2 weeks after prescription presentation). Adherence assessed through patient self-report at 26-week follow-up. Intention-to-treat analysis employed. National Health Service (NHS) costs calculated. Disease-specific Markov models estimating impact of non-adherence combined with clinical trial data to calculate costs per extra quality-adjusted life-year (QALY; NHS England perspective).ResultsUnadjusted analysis: of 327 patients still taking the initial medicine, 97/170 (57.1%) and 103/157 (65.6%) (p=0.113) patients were adherent in normal practice and NMS arms, respectively. Adjusted intention-to-treat analysis: adherence OR 1.50 (95% CI 0.93 to 2.44, p=0.095), in favour of NMS. There was a non-significant reduction in 26-week NHS costs for NMS: −£104 (95% CI −£37 to £257, p=0.168) per patient. NMS generated a mean of 0.04 (95% CI −0.01 to 0.13) more QALYs per patient, with mean reduction in lifetime cost of −£113.9 (−1159.4, 683.7). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was −£2758/QALY (2.5% and 97.5%: −38 739.5, 34 024.2. NMS has an 89% probability of cost-effectiveness at a willingness to pay of £20 000 per QALY.ConclusionsAt 26-week follow-up, NMS was unable to demonstrate a statistically significant increase in adherence or reduction in NHS costs, which may be attributable to patient attrition from the study. Long-term economic evaluation suggested NMS may deliver better patient outcomes and reduced overall healthcare costs than normal practice, but uncertainty around this finding is high.Trial registration numberNCT01635361, ISRCTN23560818, ISRCTN23560818, UKCRN12494.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 146-148
Author(s):  
Rosemary Adsley

Medication review services are an important part of the advanced services provided by community pharmacists. The aim of these services, medicines use reviews (MURs) and the new medicines service (NMS) are to identify issues patients may encounter with long term medications, support patients with adherence to new medications and to communicate issues to prescribers. By working together to improve awareness and access to these services, it is hoped that health professionals can improve adherence and reduce medication waste.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document