Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, New South Wales, Australia
Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, New South Wales, Australia.
BMJ Qual Saf. 2020 Nov;29(11):921-931. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-010608. Epub 2020 Mar 5.
Community pharmacists are well positioned to support patients' minor ailments. The objective was to evaluate the clinical and humanistic impact of a minor ailment service (MAS) in community pharmacy compared with usual pharmacist care (UC).
A cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted. Intervention patients received MAS, which included a consultation with the pharmacist. MAS pharmacists were trained in clinical pathways and communication systems mutually agreed with general practitioners and received monthly support. Control patients received UC. All patients were followed up by telephone at 14 days. Clinical and humanistic impact were defined by primary (appropriate referral rate and appropriate non-prescription medicine rate) and secondary outcomes (clinical product-based intervention rate, referral adherence, symptom resolution, reconsultation and EuroQol EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS)).
Patients (n=894) were recruited from 30 pharmacies and 82% (n=732) responded to follow-up. Patients receiving MAS were 1.5 times more likely to receive an appropriate referral (relative rate (RR)=1.51; 95% CI 1.07 to 2.11; p=0.018) and were five times more likely to adhere to referral, compared with UC (RR=5.08; 95%CI 2.02 to 12.79; p=0.001). MAS patients (94%) achieved symptom resolution or relief at follow-up, while this was 88% with UC (RR=1.06; 95% CI 1 to 1.13; p=0.035). MAS pharmacists were 1.2 times more likely to recommend an appropriate medicine (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.3; p=0.000) and were 2.6 times more likely to perform a clinical product-based intervention (RR=2.62, 95% CI 1.28 to 5.38; p=0.009), compared with UC. MAS patients had a greater mean difference in VAS at follow-up (4.08; 95% CI 1.23 to 6.87; p=0.004). No difference in reconsultation was observed (RR=0.98; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28; p=0.89).
The study demonstrates improved clinical and humanistic outcomes with MAS. National implementation is a means to manage minor ailments more effectively in the Australian health system.
ACTRN12618000286246.
社区药剂师非常适合支持患者的小病。目的是评估社区药房小病服务(MAS)与常规药剂师护理(UC)相比的临床和人文影响。
进行了一项集群随机对照试验。干预组患者接受 MAS,包括与药剂师进行咨询。MAS 药剂师接受了临床途径和沟通系统的培训,这些途径和系统是与全科医生共同商定的,并接受每月的支持。对照组患者接受 UC。所有患者在 14 天后通过电话进行随访。临床和人文影响由主要(适当转诊率和适当非处方药率)和次要结果(基于临床产品的干预率、转诊依从性、症状缓解、再咨询和 EuroQol EQ-5D 视觉模拟量表(VAS))来定义。
从 30 家药店招募了 894 名患者,82%(n=732)对随访做出了回应。与 UC 相比,接受 MAS 的患者接受适当转诊的可能性高 1.5 倍(相对率(RR)=1.51;95%置信区间 1.07 至 2.11;p=0.018),并且转诊的依从性高 5 倍(RR=5.08;95%置信区间 2.02 至 12.79;p=0.001)。MAS 患者(94%)在随访时达到症状缓解或缓解,而 UC 患者为 88%(RR=1.06;95%置信区间 1 至 1.13;p=0.035)。MAS 药剂师推荐适当药物的可能性高 1.2 倍(RR 1.20,95%置信区间 1.1 至 1.3;p=0.000),进行基于临床产品的干预的可能性高 2.6 倍(RR=2.62,95%置信区间 1.28 至 5.38;p=0.009),与 UC 相比。MAS 患者在随访时的 VAS 平均差值更大(4.08;95%置信区间 1.23 至 6.87;p=0.004)。没有观察到再咨询的差异(RR=0.98;95%置信区间 0.75 至 1.28;p=0.89)。
该研究表明 MAS 可改善临床和人文结局。国家实施是在澳大利亚卫生系统中更有效地管理小病的一种手段。
ACTRN12618000286246。