scholarly journals A cooperation project between hospital pharmacists and general practitioners about drug interactions in clinical practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 301-309
Author(s):  
Valeria Vinciguerra ◽  
Roberto Fantozzi ◽  
Clara Cena ◽  
Roberta Fruttero ◽  
Carla Rolle
2007 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 1227-1233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fanny Depont ◽  
Frédéric Vargas ◽  
Hervé Dutronc ◽  
Emmanuelle Giauque ◽  
Jean-Marie Ragnaud ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nada F. Khan ◽  
Helen P. Booth ◽  
Puja Myles ◽  
David Mullett ◽  
Arlene Gallagher ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Quality improvement (QI) initiatives are increasingly used to improve the quality of care and reduce prescribing errors. The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) QI initiative uses routinely collected electronic primary care data to provide bespoke practice-level reports on prescribing safety. The aim of this study was to explore how the QI reports were used, barriers and facilitators to use, long-term culture change and perceived impact on patient care and practices systems as a result of receiving the reports. Methods A qualitative study using purposive sampling of practices contributing to the CPRD, semi-structured interviews and inductive thematic analysis. We interviewed general practitioners, pharmacists, practice managers and research nurses. Results We conducted 18 interviews, and organised themes summarising the use of QI reports in practice: receiving the report, facilitators and barriers to acting upon the reports, acting upon the report, and how the reports contribute to a quality culture. Effective dissemination of reports, and a positive attitude to audit and the perceived relevance of the clinical topic facilitated use. Lack of time and failure to see or act upon the reports meant they were not used. Factors influencing use of the reports included the structure of the report, ease of identifying cases, and perceptions about coding accuracy. GPs and pharmacists used the reports to conduct case reviews and directly contact patients to discuss unsafe prescribing and patient medication preferences. Finally, the reports contributed to the development of a quality culture within practices through promoting audit activity and acting as a reminder of good prescribing behaviours, promoting future patient safety initiatives, contributing to continuing professional development and improving local networks. Conclusions This study found the reports facilitated individual case review leading to an enhanced sense of quality culture in practices where they were utilised. Our findings demonstrate that the reports were generally considered useful and have been used to support patient safety and clinical practice in specific cases.


2022 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Kostopoulou ◽  
Kavleen Arora ◽  
Bence Pálfi

Abstract Background Cancer risk algorithms were introduced to clinical practice in the last decade, but they remain underused. We investigated whether General Practitioners (GPs) change their referral decisions in response to an unnamed algorithm, if decisions improve, and if changing decisions depends on having information about the algorithm and on whether GPs overestimated or underestimated risk. Methods 157 UK GPs were presented with 20 vignettes describing patients with possible colorectal cancer symptoms. GPs gave their risk estimates and inclination to refer. They then saw the risk score of an unnamed algorithm and could update their responses. Half of the sample was given information about the algorithm’s derivation, validation, and accuracy. At the end, we measured their algorithm disposition. We analysed the data using multilevel regressions with random intercepts by GP and vignette. Results We find that, after receiving the algorithm’s estimate, GPs’ inclination to refer changes 26% of the time and their decisions switch entirely 3% of the time. Decisions become more consistent with the NICE 3% referral threshold (OR 1.45 [1.27, 1.65], p < .001). The algorithm’s impact is greatest when GPs have underestimated risk. Information about the algorithm does not have a discernible effect on decisions but it results in a more positive GP disposition towards the algorithm. GPs’ risk estimates become better calibrated over time, i.e., move closer to the algorithm. Conclusions Cancer risk algorithms have the potential to improve cancer referral decisions. Their use as learning tools to improve risk estimates is promising and should be further investigated.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 1041-1048
Author(s):  
Vicente Escudero-Vilaplana ◽  
Roberto Collado-Borrell ◽  
Angela Hoyo-Muñoz ◽  
Alvaro Gimenez-Manzorro ◽  
Antonio Calles ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Florine A. Berger ◽  
Heleen van der Sijs ◽  
Matthijs L. Becker ◽  
Teun van Gelder ◽  
Patricia M. L. A. van den Bemt

1988 ◽  
Vol 153 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Horder

Psychiatrists and general practitioners have found new ways of working together in the last ten years, but there have also been separate activities which could develop into rivalry. These opportunities and dangers are the central theme of this paper. Ways are considered in which the psychiatry of general practice differs from the experience of psychiatrists. Forms of help are suggested which general practitioners need from psychiatrists, whether in clinical practice or education.


2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 1100-1107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena González-Colominas ◽  
María-Carlota Londoño ◽  
Rosa M Morillas ◽  
Xavier Torras ◽  
Sergi Mojal ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document