Hattingh H Laetitia, Kelly Fiona, Fowler Jane, Wheeler Amanda J
School of Pharmacy, Griffith University, Gold Coast, 4222, Australia; School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, 6102, Australia.
School of Pharmacy, Griffith University, Gold Coast, 4222, Australia; Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, 4222, Australia.
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2017 Sep-Oct;13(5):969-979. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2017.05.017. Epub 2017 May 29.
Community pharmacists are in an ideal position to promote and provide mental health medication management services. However, formalised or structured pharmacy services to support consumers with mental health conditions are scarce. Australian mental health consumers indicated a need for targeted community pharmacy mental health services which presented an opportunity to develop an intervention that were integrated with remunerated professional services.
The study aimed to pilot a mental health medication management intervention in Australian community pharmacies. Pharmacists worked in partnership with consumers, carers and mental health workers over three to six months to set and support achievement of individual goals related to medicines use, physical health and mental wellbeing. This paper provides a comparison of community pharmacies that successfully delivered the intervention with those that did not and identifies facilitators and challenges to service implementation.
One hundred pharmacies opted to pilot the delivery of the intervention in three Australian states (Queensland, Western Australia and northern New South Wales). Of those, 55 successfully delivered the intervention (completers) whilst 45 were unsuccessful (non-completers). A mixed methods approach, including quantitative pharmacy surveys and qualitative semi-structured interviews, was used to gather data from participating pharmacies. Following intervention development, 142 pharmacists and 21 pharmacy support staff attended training workshops, received resource kits and ongoing support from consumer and pharmacist mentors throughout intervention implementation. Baseline quantitative data was collected from each pharmacy on staff profile, volume of medicines dispensed, the range of professional services delivered and relationships with health professionals. At the completion of the study participants were invited to complete an online exit survey and take part in a semi-structured interview that explored their experiences of intervention implementation and delivery. Twenty-nine staff members from completer pharmacies returned exit surveys and interviews were conducted with 30 staff from completer and non-completer pharmacies.
Descriptive analyses of quantitative data and thematic analyses of qualitative data were used to compare completers and non-completers. Baseline similarities included numbers of general and mental health prescriptions dispensed and established professional services. However, there was greater prevalence of diabetes management, opioid substitution services, and relationships with mental health services in completer pharmacies. Key facilitators for completers included pharmacy owner/manager support, staff buy-in and involvement, intervention flexibility, recruitment immediately following training, integration of intervention with existing services, changes to workflow, and regular consumer contact. Key barriers for both groups included lack of pharmacy owner/manager support or staff buy-in, time constraints, privacy limitations and pilot project associated paperwork.
Insights into factors that underpinned successful intervention implementation and delivery should inform effective strategies for similar future studies and allocation of pharmacy mental health service delivery resources.
社区药剂师处于推广和提供心理健康药物管理服务的理想位置。然而,支持有心理健康问题消费者的正规或结构化药房服务却很稀缺。澳大利亚心理健康消费者表示需要有针对性的社区药房心理健康服务,这为开发与有偿专业服务相结合的干预措施提供了契机。
该研究旨在在澳大利亚社区药房试点一项心理健康药物管理干预措施。药剂师与消费者、护理人员和心理健康工作者合作三到六个月,以设定并支持实现与药物使用、身体健康和心理健康相关的个人目标。本文比较了成功实施干预措施的社区药房和未成功实施的社区药房,并确定了服务实施的促进因素和挑战。
100家药房选择在澳大利亚的三个州(昆士兰州、西澳大利亚州和新南威尔士州北部)试点实施该干预措施。其中,55家成功实施了干预措施(完成者),而45家未成功(未完成者)。采用混合方法,包括定量药房调查和定性半结构化访谈,从参与的药房收集数据。在干预措施制定后,142名药剂师和21名药房支持人员参加了培训研讨会,收到了资源包,并在整个干预实施过程中得到了消费者和药剂师导师的持续支持。从每家药房收集了关于员工概况、配药数量、提供的专业服务范围以及与卫生专业人员关系的基线定量数据。在研究结束时,邀请参与者完成在线退出调查,并参加半结构化访谈,探讨他们在干预实施和交付方面的经验。来自完成者药房的29名工作人员返回了退出调查,对来自完成者和未完成者药房的30名工作人员进行了访谈。
使用定量数据的描述性分析和定性数据的主题分析来比较完成者和未完成者。基线相似之处包括普通和心理健康处方的配药数量以及既定的专业服务。然而,完成者药房中糖尿病管理、阿片类药物替代服务以及与心理健康服务的关系更为普遍。完成者的关键促进因素包括药房所有者/经理的支持、员工的认同和参与、干预措施的灵活性、培训后立即招募、干预措施与现有服务的整合、工作流程的改变以及与消费者的定期联系。两组的关键障碍包括缺乏药房所有者/经理的支持或员工的认同、时间限制、隐私限制以及与试点项目相关的文书工作。
对支撑成功干预实施和交付的因素的洞察应为未来类似研究的有效策略以及药房心理健康服务交付资源的分配提供参考。