The standards of practice for delivery of polypharmacy and chronic disease medication reviews by general practice clinical pharmacists: a consensus study.
Earle-Payne, Katie; Forsyth, Paul; Johnson, Chris F.; Harrison, Heather; Robertson, Susan; Weidmann, Anita E.
Chris F. Johnson
Anita E. Weidmann
Background: General practice in the UK is experiencing a crisis. Greater multidisciplinary working is a potential solution. The new general practice contract in Scotland encourages this and includes a new pharmacotherapy service to be delivered by General Practice Clinical Pharmacists (GPCPs). Consensus is lacking for the standards of practice for delivery of pharmacotherapy medication reviews (which are polypharmacy and chronic medication reviews) as part of this service. Aim: To identify and validate standards of practice for polypharmacy and chronic disease medication (pharmacotherapy level 3) reviews conducted by GPCPs. Method: A two-phased mixed-methods consensus methodology was used. Phase 1: An expert group of GPCPs (n = 4) and clinical pharmacist managers (n = 2) responsible for delivering the pharmacotherapy service used a Modified Nominal Group Technique to generate potential standards. Phase 2: Two-round Delphi survey involving GPCPs with ? 1 year of experience of working in general practice (n = 159). Results: The expert group identified 44 potential standards of practice for polypharmacy and chronic disease reviews. Practicing GPCPs indicated during the Delphi phase that the 44 standards were applicable to practice. The standards of practice covered seven main categories: skills, environment, qualifications, qualities and behaviours, knowledge, process and experience. Conclusion: Practicing GPCPs indicated that the standards identified by the expert group are acceptable and valid for current practice and the delivery of polypharmacy and chronic medication reviews. The application of these standards to practice may help GPCPs and general practices to ensure equitable delivery of patient care.
EARLE-PAYNE, K., FORSYTH, P., JOHNSON, C.F., HARRISON, H., ROBERTSON, S. and WEIDMANN, A.E. 2022. The standards of practice for delivery of polypharmacy and chronic disease medication reviews by general practice clinical pharmacists: a consensus study. International journal of clinical pharmacy [online], 44(3), pages 663-672. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-022-01387-7
|Journal Article Type||Article|
|Acceptance Date||Feb 15, 2022|
|Online Publication Date||Mar 23, 2022|
|Publication Date||Jun 30, 2022|
|Deposit Date||Apr 4, 2022|
|Publicly Available Date||Apr 4, 2022|
|Journal||International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy|
|Peer Reviewed||Peer Reviewed|
|Keywords||Chronic disease medication reviews; Pharmacy practice; Polypharmacy reviews; Primary care; Standards of practice|
|Additional Information||The accompanying file with this output contains supplementary material at the end of the main text.|
EARLE-PAYNE 2022 The standards of practice
Publisher Licence URL
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/llicenses/by/4.0/.
You might also like
Key stakeholders' experiences with the implementation of medication reviews in community pharmacies: a systematic review.
Presentation / Conference
The role of community pharmacists in immunisation: a national cross-sectional study.