15
I t is well established that the concept of continuity of care is important for the delivery of quality health care. 1,2 Health- care professionals, researchers, and poli- cy makers regularly use the phrase to im- ply a high standard of health care and valued professional practice. 3 Although a plethora of diverse descriptions of conti- nuity of care have been published, there is a lack of consensus on the definition of the phrase both across and within healthcare disciplines. 4 Research encompassing continuity of care as a concept, goal, or outcome is abundant in medical and nursing litera- ture and there has been in-depth discus- sion of the factors that contribute to dif- ferent types of continuity of care for spe- cific purposes. 5 However, in addition to the lack of consensus on a definition, the definitions available in the literature are not broad enough to include multidisci- plinary healthcare practices. 6 In particu- lar, literature on research showing how pharmacists contribute to patients’ conti- nuity of care is sparse. As an example of the diverse use of the phrase, general medical practitioners Quality Patient Care and Pharmacists’ Role in Its Continuity— A Systematic Review Glena R Ellitt, Jo-anne E Brien, Parisa Aslani, and Timothy F Chen Medication Therapy Management Author information provided at the end of the text. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2009 April, Volume 43 677 www.theannals.com BACKGROUND: Continuity of care is important for the delivery of quality health care. Despite the abundance of research on this concept in the medical and nursing literature, there is a lack of consensus on its definition. As pharmacists have moved beyond their historical product-centered practice, a source of patient-centered research on continuity of care for practice application is required. OBJECTIVE: To determine the scope of research in which pharmacists were directly involved in patients’ continuity of care and to examine how the phrase continuity of care was defined and applied in practice. METHODS: A working definition of continuity of care and a tool for relevance quality assessment of search articles were developed. MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration evidence- based medicine reviews and bibliographies were searched (1996–March 2008). Reporting clarity was assessed by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials checklist and outcomes were grouped by economic, clinical, and/or humanistic classification. RESULTS: The search yielded 21 clinical and randomized controlled trials, including 11 pharmacist-only and 10 multidisciplinary studies. A broad range of research topics was identified and detailed analysis provided ready reference for considerations of research replication or practice application. Studies revealed a range of research aims, settings, subject characteristics, attrition rates and group sizes, interventions, measurement tools, outcomes, and definitions of continuity of care. Research focused on patients with depression (n = 4), cardiovascular disease (n = 4), diabetes (n = 2), and dyslipidemia (n = 1); specific drugs included non–tricyclic antidepressants, cardiovascular drugs, and benzodiazepines. From the proposed endpoints of economic cost (n = 6) and clinical (n = 14) and humanistic (n = 16) outcomes, 15 studies reported statistically significant results. CONCLUSIONS: Medication management at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels of care indicated an expanded role and collaboration of pharmacists in continuity of care. However, the exclusion of disadvantaged patients in 19 studies is at odds with continuity of care for these patients, who may have been the most in need for the same reason that they were excluded. KEY WORDS: cardiovascular disease, continuity of care, depression, diabetes, medications, pharmacist. Ann Pharmacother 2009;43:677-91. Published Online, 31 Mar 2009, www.theannals.com, DOI 10.1345/aph.1L505 See also page 745. at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014 aop.sagepub.com Downloaded from

Quality Patient Care and Pharmacists' Role in Its Continuity--A Systematic Review

  • Upload
    t-f

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • It is well established that the concept ofcontinuity of care is important for thedelivery of quality health care.1,2 Health-care professionals, researchers, and poli-cy makers regularly use the phrase to im-ply a high standard of health care andvalued professional practice.3 Although aplethora of diverse descriptions of conti-nuity of care have been published, thereis a lack of consensus on the definitionof the phrase both across and withinhealthcare disciplines.4

    Research encompassing continuity ofcare as a concept, goal, or outcome isabundant in medical and nursing litera-ture and there has been in-depth discus-sion of the factors that contribute to dif-ferent types of continuity of care for spe-cific purposes.5 However, in addition tothe lack of consensus on a definition, thedefinitions available in the literature arenot broad enough to include multidisci-plinary healthcare practices.6 In particu-lar, literature on research showing howpharmacists contribute to patients conti-nuity of care is sparse.

    As an example of the diverse use ofthe phrase, general medical practitioners

    Quality Patient Care and Pharmacists Role in Its Continuity

    A Systematic Review

    Glena R Ellitt, Jo-anne E Brien, Parisa Aslani, and Timothy F Chen

    Medication Therapy Management

    Author information provided at the end of thetext.

    The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 n 677www.theannals.com

    BACKGROUND: Continuity of care is important for the delivery of quality healthcare. Despite the abundance of research on this concept in the medical andnursing literature, there is a lack of consensus on its definition. As pharmacistshave moved beyond their historical product-centered practice, a source ofpatient-centered research on continuity of care for practice application is required.

    OBJECTIVE: To determine the scope of research in which pharmacists weredirectly involved in patients continuity of care and to examine how the phrasecontinuity of care was defined and applied in practice.

    METHODS: A working definition of continuity of care and a tool for relevancequality assessment of search articles were developed. MEDLINE, InternationalPharmaceutical Abstracts, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration evidence-based medicine reviews and bibliographies were searched (1996March 2008).Reporting clarity was assessed by the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trialschecklist and outcomes were grouped by economic, clinical, and/or humanisticclassification.

    RESULTS: The search yielded 21 clinical and randomized controlled trials,including 11 pharmacist-only and 10 multidisciplinary studies. A broad range ofresearch topics was identified and detailed analysis provided ready reference forconsiderations of research replication or practice application. Studies revealed arange of research aims, settings, subject characteristics, attrition rates and groupsizes, interventions, measurement tools, outcomes, and definitions of continuityof care. Research focused on patients with depression (n = 4), cardiovasculardisease (n = 4), diabetes (n = 2), and dyslipidemia (n = 1); specific drugs includednontricyclic antidepressants, cardiovascular drugs, and benzodiazepines. Fromthe proposed endpoints of economic cost (n = 6) and clinical (n = 14) andhumanistic (n = 16) outcomes, 15 studies reported statistically significant results.

    CONCLUSIONS: Medication management at primary, secondary, and tertiary levelsof care indicated an expanded role and collaboration of pharmacists in continuityof care. However, the exclusion of disadvantaged patients in 19 studies is at oddswith continuity of care for these patients, who may have been the most in needfor the same reason that they were excluded.

    KEY WORDS: cardiovascular disease, continuity of care, depression, diabetes,medications, pharmacist.

    Ann Pharmacother 2009;43:677-91.

    Published Online, 31 Mar 2009, www.theannals.com, DOI 10.1345/aph.1L505

    See also page 745.

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • proposed a biopsychosocial triple diagnosis model to com-bine continuity elements such as interpersonal, informa-tional, and cross-boundary continuity of care. The viewthat continuity of care could exist only over a long periodof time, or that it was a paradox that continuity of carecould be researched by a cross-sectional study, illustrates apredilection for continuity to be expressed only in mea-sures of time.7,8 No clear preference for one type or de-scription of continuity of care was reported.

    From a UK nursing perspective, the importance ofseamless care for patient transition between primary andacute care sectors was defined as including (1) surmount-able organizational boundaries, (2) responsible and ac-countable practitioners, and (3) the use of multiprofession-al teams.9 However, this definition does not have a patientfocus or specific requirement for quality care.

    Other multidisciplinary research teams described conti-nuity of care as an outcome comprising the 2 core ele-ments of individual patient care and care delivered overtime.10 Specifically, they suggested 3 types of continuity ofcare, which encompassed informational, management andrelational continuity, and connected and coherent care toovercome organizational and disciplinary boundaries.

    The terms continuity of care and seamless care havealso been used to describe effective communication in themovement of patients and information across primary andsecondary care boundaries. The potential roles for commu-nity liaison pharmacists, electronic patient records, trans-fers across care interfaces, stakeholders views, and opti-mal postdischarge visiting times have been researched.11,12

    The meaning of continuity of care was not reported in thecontext of these studies, but its importance was recognizedand continuity of care elements included intraorganization-al continuity, barriers, and boundaries.

    In addition to discussing the expansion of pharmaciststraditional role as dispensers of medicines, Kuehl et al.13

    commented that the term continuity of care had been re-peatedly redefined to accommodate changes over theyears. The phrase was traditionally associated with physi-cianpatient relationships without any reference to anyother healthcare professions.

    Our objectives were to determine the scope of research,through a systematic literature review, in which pharma-cists were directly involved in patients continuity ofhealth care and to examine how the phrase continuity ofcare was defined and applied in practice.

    Search Strategy

    We accessed the Cochrane Collaboration glossary ofterms and followed the University of York guidelines forthe conduct of systematic reviews and search strategies, es-pecially for randomized controlled trials (RCTs).14,15 Thereporting of key points of the research, as listed in the Con-

    solidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)guidelines for the publication of research describing RCTs,was taken as an indication of the clarity of reporting in theselected articles.16

    REVIEW QUESTION FORMULATION

    A broad review of the scope of pharmacy research andpractice was planned and 2 main queries became apparent:(1) what published research was centered around the con-cept of continuity of care and (2) which of those studies in-volved pharmacists as interventionists in well-designedstudies.17,18 These 2 questions formed the review objectivesand requirements for practicing interventionist pharmacistsand well-designed studies were included in the review in-clusion criteria.

    REVIEW CRITERIA

    Inclusion criteria required that (1) practicing pharma-cists were the researchers and/or the interventionists; (2)continuity of care or one of its synonyms was describedand/or thematically underpinned the study; (3) researchhad been peer reviewed; and (4) research design was wellstructured, with randomized subjects and comparison ofparallel intervention and control groups (eg, RCTs).

    Studies were excluded if they were laboratory-based,used pharmacy records only, did not directly involve thepharmacist as interventionist, recruited subjects other thanpatients, or were not in English.

    OUTCOME CATEGORIZATION

    Outcomes were categorized as economic, clinical, orhumanistic outcomes (ECHO). The ECHO frameworkrepresented a balanced-system approach, as the inclusionof process and outcome indications satisfied a broaderrange of healthcare stakeholders by including economicanalysis.19,20

    CLARITY OF REPORTING

    Each article was assessed for the clarity with whichstudy characteristics, design, methods, intervention imple-mentation, endpoints, impacts, experiential constraints, andconstructive criticisms of the research were reported.16 Adetailed assessment of the clarity of reporting is outside thescope of this review. The reporting of these measures wasrecorded as clear, not clear, or not reported.21

    RELEVANCE QUALITY ASSESSMENT TOOL

    A relevance quality assessment tool was developed forthis study (available from GRE). To assess the relevance ofthe retrieved articles, the reviewers were blinded to all au-

    678 n The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 www.theannals.com

    GR Ellit et al.

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • thor details. Relevance assessment was conducted in 2rounds (Figure 1).22-24

    In the first round, retrieved abstracts were assessed againstthe review objectives and allocated into 1 of 3 tiers of rele-

    vance by 3 reviewers. The first tier contained articles that allreviewers agreed were relevant, the second tier contained ar-ticles assessed as relevant by 2 of the reviewers, and the thirdtier articles were deemed not relevant and were eliminated.

    Quality Patient Care and Pharmacists Role in Its Continuity

    The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 n 679www.theannals.com

    Figure 1. Search protocol for systematic search and processes for article selection. Search was limited to English language and human research.ASHP = American Society of Health-System Pharmacists; CCT = controlled clinical trial; CCTR = Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; DSR= Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; EBM = evidence-based medicine; RCT = randomized controlled trial. aIPA (International Pharmaceutical Abstracts).bEMBASE.cBIOSIS Previews (19) and Biological Abstracts (23).dGrey literature.

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • In the second round, retained articles were assessedfrom full copies of the articles and their relevance to thereview objectives was reestablished. Additionally, thequality (or degree) of the reestablished relevance was as-sessed by determining how well the studys researchcharacteristics (eg, study design) met the review inclu-sion/exclusion criteria.

    WORKING DEFINITION OF CONTINUITY OF CARE

    Published descriptions of continuity of care commonlyrequire a specific period of time for continuous care by onehealthcare discipline in a narrow setting and fail to men-tion the quality of patient care.9,10,25 For this review, a work-ing definition was developed to accommodate the widestpossible application of the phrase: continuity of care is aperception of quality health care resulting from the ongo-ing management of issues which cause disruption to opti-mal patient care.

    Key components of the definition were identified by thereporting of such elements as (1) whose perception of con-tinuity of care was researched, (2) improved quality healthcare as an aim or outcome, (3) the ongoing nature of thecare, and (4) management of specific issues that disruptoptimal patient care (both the management and the optimalpatient care should be described). The actual reporting ofthese components, rather than the style of reporting, wasrecorded as clear, not clear, or not reported.

    This definition facilitated the review of articles that con-tained different descriptions of continuity of care and re-search conducted by various healthcare professionals. Itformed a common basis for reviewers to assess articlesthat used the phrase continuity of care but did not ex-plain its meaning. Articles were assessed for (1) a defini-tion of continuity of care, (2) the meaning of the phrasein the context of the research, and (3) any of the 4 com-ponents of the working definition to describe continuityof care.

    LITERATURE SEARCH

    Topic synonyms for the electronic search (Figure 1) in-cluded continuity of care, continuous care, continuum ofcare, seamless care, barriers to care, and ongoing care.Synonyms and word derivatives for interventionists in-cluded pharmacist, pharmacy, pharmacies, communitypharmacy, pharmacy services, hospitals, and pharmacypractice. Search filters included RCTs, controlled clinicaltrials, random allocation, double-blind method, single-blind method, clinical trials, crossover studies, and place-bos. English language, human, and human and animalwere also used as filters. The latter filter prevented exclu-sion of research that studied human allergic reactions, suchas asthma, to animals.

    DATA SOURCES

    Electronic databases that we searched (1996March2008) included MEDLINE; International PharmaceuticalAbstracts; EMBASE; BIOSIS Previews and Biological Ab-stracts; and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews, and Database of Sys-tematic Reviews. Key informant/expert contact, grey litera-ture, and selected article bibliographies were also evaluated.

    As the scope of pharmacists research was to be deter-mined, the research elicited was not necessarily homoge-nous for any additional research components.18,22,23

    Data Extraction

    REVIEW RESULTS

    Figure 1 shows the breakdown of articles retrieved fromall databases, the number selected or not retained, and rea-sons for the nonselection of articles, including the last 12 arti-cles discarded.26-37 Of the 181 articles that were found byelectronic search, 21 were finally selected for review.13,38-57

    RESEARCH STUDY DESIGNS

    The electronic search filtered articles by research design;13 of the 21 studies were described as RCTs and 2 were con-trolled clinical trials. The remaining 6 studies reported ran-domized subjects divided into parallel control and experi-mental groups and described an intervention strategy.

    Patients were the unit of randomization in 16 studies.38-53

    In 2 studies, general practitioners and their patients wererandomized into intervention and control groups.54,55 In 1study, the community pharmacy and its customers wereclassed as a unit of randomization.56 In 2 studies, patientsand healthcare providers were randomized as separateunits at more than one level.13,57

    RESEARCH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    Thirteen studies were conducted in the US, 2 were con-ducted in Australia, 2 were conducted in Canada, and 1study apiece was conducted in the UK, Chile, the Nether-lands, and Northern Ireland.

    Table 1 shows 21 studies with a diverse range of re-search goals. Thirteen studies had goals that were clearlyrecorded, 7 had goals that were not clearly recorded, and 1study did not record a goal. Three studies targeted nontri-cyclic antidepressants, cardiovascular drugs, or benzodi-azepines; 7 targeted patients with hypertension, depression,dysthymia, diabetes, or chronic heart failure. The remain-ing 11 studies targeted medications in general or pharmacyservices. Research settings included specialist medicalclinics (n = 5), community pharmacies (6), combinationsettings (6), and hospitals (4).

    680 n The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 www.theannals.com

    GR Ellit et al.

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • RESEARCH INTERVENTION CATEGORIES

    Intervention types were compared for similarities andwere categorized by their main focus, as some studies in-cluded more than one approach (Table 1). There were 5broad emergent categories: (1) education/counseling, in-cluding patient education and/or professional counseling (n= 11); (2) medication management and review (n = 7); (3)compliance/adherence assessment with such things asprepackaged drug doses or special container caps (n = 2);(4) new technologies such as electronic dispensing systems

    (n = 3); and (5) information transfer, such as establishedforms of communication between professionals and pa-tients (n = 1).

    RESEARCH SAMPLE SIZES

    The number of subjects recruited for each study rangedfrom 4250 to 133942 patients. Initial intervention group sizesand the attrition rate are shown in Table 2; final interven-tion group sizes ranged from 1747 to 37954 subjects for out-come analyses. In some cases this final number was

    Quality Patient Care and Pharmacists Role in Its Continuity

    The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 n 681www.theannals.com

    Table 1. Reviewed Studies: Design Characteristics, Research Settings, and Intervention Categories

    Research Research Reference Location Study Goal Study Focus Setting Intervention Category

    Al-Rashed UK improve pre- and postdischarge medications in general hospital and education, counseling(2002)57 counseling home

    Bolas Northern develop liaison pharmacist role postdischarge follow-up combinationa information transfer(2004)38 Ireland

    Borenstein US compare effectiveness of a systematic hypertension specialist clinic new technology(2003)39 approach to care

    Brook Netherlands improve attitudes toward drug use nontricyclic community education, take-home (2003)40 antidepressants pharmacy video, counseling

    Bucci US reinforce medication appropriateness cardiovascular drugs specialist clinic medication management(2003)41

    Bungay US improve documentation of care depression, dysthymia specialist clinic education, counseling(2004)42

    Capoccia US recognize the impact of care depression specialist clinic education, counseling(2004)43

    Crotty Australia improve hospital transfer by adding a impact of transfer combinationa manage transfer, (2004)44 transition coordinator medication compliance

    Dudas US streamline discharge planning general medical service hospital telephone medication (2001)45 patients management

    Finley US optimize drug therapy through benzodiazepines combinationa medication management(2003)46 collaborative care model

    Fischer US assess pharmaceutical care program healthcare, medication community education, counseling(2002)56 for resource utilization use, and charges pharmacy

    Jaber US develop a model of care type 2 diabetes specialist clinic education, medication (1996)47 management

    Kuehl US efficiently exchange information healthcare corporation combinationa new technology(1998)13 practices

    Murray US develop and assess a multilevel chronic heart failure, community education, medication (2004)48 pharmacy-based program low health literacy pharmacy labeling and management

    Nickerson Canada examine drug therapy for omissions clinical impact hospital education, counseling(2005)49

    Pauls Chile design pharmaceutical care program dyslipidemia community education, counseling(2005)50 pharmacy

    Rothman US examine disease management cardiovascular risk in community education, new technology(2005)51 diabetes pharmacy

    Sellors Canada reduce unit of medication intake collaboration between community medication management(2003)54 general practitioners pharmacy

    and pharmacists

    Smith US develop seamless care service delivery combinationa telephone helpline; (1997)52 education, counseling

    Sorensen Australia examine multidisciplinary service medication review healthcare medication management(2004)55 model community

    Voirol US determine medication supply within postdischarge delays hospital supply and compliance (2004)53 24 h of discharge assistance

    aCombination = hospital, community pharmacy, community general practitioner, specialist clinic, and/or patients home.

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • markedly reduced by preselection or subject eliminationbefore randomization into intervention or control groups.In several studies, intervention group size and attritionnumbers were not clearly reported.

    RESEARCH RECRUITMENT CRITERIA

    As shown in Table 2, a total of 19 studies excluded pa-tients who were considered disadvantaged in some way,such as those with impaired cognition, poor languageskills, or mental illness. Three studies did not report anyexclusion criteria but listed similar recruitment limitationsunder inclusion criteria.44,51,57 Not all criteria appear in thetable; additional or other criteria included socioeconom-ic requirements (health insurance), specific geographicalboundaries, and reliable telephone access.

    RESEARCH OUTCOME CATEGORIES

    The ECHO categorization of proposed endpoints (Table2) resulted in 6 studies proposing an economic cost analysis,14 proposing clinical outcomes, and 16 proposing humanis-tic outcomes. These totals are a combination of separatelylisted outcomes and those listed as economic, clinical, andhumanistic outcomes. Each study was also examined for astatement on the achievement of its stated goals. Researchersclearly stated their achievement in 11 studies, researcherswere not clear in 3, and there was no comment in 7.

    PHARMACIST ROLE IN RESEARCH

    In all studies, pharmacists were clearly included as in-terventionists regardless of whether they were the onlyhealthcare professionals involved. Other healthcare profes-sionals included general practitioners, medical specialists,and registered nurses. Studies that involved 3 or more dis-ciplines were listed as multidisciplinary projects (Table 2).There were 11 pharmacist-only studies, 8 multidisciplinarystudies, and 2 studies conducted by pharmacists attachedto medical specialty clinics.

    INCLUSION OF CONTINUITY OF CARE IN RESEARCH

    Eleven articles clearly contained the phrase continuityof care, a synonym, and/or several topic keywords.13,38,41,42,46,48,49,52,53,55,57 Two articles contained 1 or 2separate key words and/or partial phrases and werescored as not clear44,51; 8 articles contained 2 keywords.39,40,43,45,47,50,54,56

    Of the 11 articles that clearly contained continuity ofcare terminology, 3 studies defined or described the con-cept13,38,49 and 1 study contained a description of the con-cept that was not clear.40 At least 2 components (eg, ongo-ing management, health issues) of the continuity of careworking definition were identified in 18 of the 21 studies.

    However, none included all components. Three studies in-cluded continuity of care key words but no components ofthe working definition.

    SCOPE OF RESEARCH

    An overview of each study is shown in Table 3, where the21 studies are divided into 4 theme groups that are not mutu-ally exclusive but that describe the management componentof this reviews working definition of continuity of care.

    The 4 emergent themes were disease state management(eg, control of blood pressure in patients with hyper-tension39), medication management (eg, provision of hos-pital discharge summaries57), management of specificclasses of medication, and patient and information transfer.Table 3 summarizes study factors assessed, assessmentmethods, study outcomes, and when statistical significancewas reported.

    Data Synthesis

    An objective of this review was to determine the scopeof research in which pharmacists were directly involved inpatients continuity of care. The number and heteroge-neous nature of the reviewed studies made meta-analysis,or conventional, large-scale statistical analysis of compara-ble data, inappropriate.18,22,23,58

    RESEARCH STUDY DESIGNS

    The reviewed research was conducted in settings and bymultidisciplinary teams that reflect the broader role ofpharmacists in hospitals, clinics, and the community. Vari-ations in features of the study design, especially the rangeof settings, provide an opportunity for the reproduction ofthe research and the practical application of the interven-tions by most practicing pharmacists.

    RESEARCH SUBJECT RECRUITMENT

    A majority of studies (n = 19) specified exclusion crite-ria for patients with any form of cognition impairment, men-tal illness, history of substance abuse, or poor language skills(especially English). Alternative comments described the ex-clusion of patients unable to accurately record a survey formor patients who had difficulty expressing themselves verbal-ly. The effect on results, as well as the generalizability of theoutcomes, when excluding these patients, was not discussedin any of the research reviewed.

    CLARITY OF RESEARCH REPORTING

    Based on the actual reporting of key points, review as-sessment resulted in the research by Sellors et al.,54 Brooket al.,40 Rothman et al.,51 and Sorensen et al.55 showing the

    682 n The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 www.theannals.com

    GR Ellit et al.

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • Quality Patient Care and Pharmacists Role in Its Continuity

    The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 n 683www.theannals.com

    Tabl

    e2.

    Des

    ign

    Cha

    ract

    eris

    tics,

    Sam

    ple

    Siz

    e,an

    dP

    ropo

    sed

    End

    poin

    tCat

    egor

    yof

    Rev

    iew

    edS

    tudi

    es

    Fin

    alP

    rop

    ose

    dS

    ub

    ject

    sIn

    itia

    lIn

    terv

    enti

    on

    En

    dp

    oin

    tsH

    ealt

    hca

    reR

    ecru

    ited

    ,In

    terv

    enti

    on

    Gro

    up

    ,n(E

    CH

    OR

    efer

    ence

    Pro

    fess

    ion

    als

    Incl

    usi

    on

    Cri

    teri

    aaE

    xclu

    sio

    nC

    rite

    ria

    NG

    rou

    p,n

    (%at

    triti

    on

    )ca

    teg

    ory

    )

    Al-R

    ashe

    dph

    arm

    acis

    tspr

    escr

    ibed

    4dr

    ugs,

    first

    lang

    uage

    Eng

    lish,

    men

    tal

    none

    liste

    d89

    4543

    (4)

    notc

    lear

    (200

    2)57

    heal

    thsc

    ore

    >7/

    10b

    Bol

    as(2

    004)

    38ph

    arm

    acis

    tsta

    king

    3re

    gula

    rdr

    ugs

    poor

    com

    mun

    icat

    ion

    skill

    s,al

    coho

    l-rel

    ated

    orm

    enta

    l24

    311

    981

    (32)

    hum

    anis

    ticill

    ness

    b

    Bor

    enst

    ein

    clin

    icph

    arm

    acis

    tun

    cont

    rolle

    dhy

    pert

    ensi

    on,c

    apita

    ted

    insu

    ranc

    ead

    vanc

    edde

    men

    tia,t

    erm

    inal

    illne

    ss,o

    rgan

    tran

    spla

    nt,

    1272

    9898

    (0)

    econ

    omic

    ,(2

    003)

    39se

    cond

    ary

    hype

    rten

    sion

    bcl

    inic

    al

    Bro

    ok(2

    003)

    40ph

    arm

    acis

    tsD

    utch

    lang

    uage

    skill

    s,de

    pres

    sive

    heal

    thpr

    oble

    m;

    antid

    epre

    ssan

    tuse

    inpr

    evio

    us6

    mob

    151

    7050

    (28)

    hum

    anis

    ticne

    wus

    eof

    non

    tric

    yclic

    antid

    epre

    ssan

    tsb

    Buc

    ci(2

    003)

    41ph

    arm

    acis

    tsco

    nges

    tive

    hear

    tfai

    lure

    ,med

    icat

    ions

    term

    inal

    dise

    ase,

    psyc

    hiat

    ricor

    suic

    idal

    hist

    ory,

    deaf

    ness

    ;80

    3938

    (2)

    clin

    ical

    noE

    nglis

    hla

    ngua

    gesk

    illsb

    Bun

    gay

    clin

    icph

    arm

    acis

    tde

    pres

    sion

    ,dys

    thym

    ia,a

    ntid

    epre

    ssan

    tsb

    none

    liste

    d13

    3926

    824

    1(1

    0)no

    tcle

    ar(2

    004)

    42

    Cap

    occi

    am

    ultid

    isci

    plin

    ary

    new

    epis

    ode

    ofde

    pres

    sion

    ,med

    icat

    ions

    ;cle

    arex

    clus

    ion

    asse

    ssm

    entb

    y:P

    rime-

    MD

    form

    enta

    lsta

    tus

    and

    106

    3330

    (9)

    clin

    ical

    ,(2

    004)

    43E

    nglis

    h;no

    tter

    min

    ally

    ill,p

    sych

    otic

    ,or

    alco

    holic

    bA

    UD

    ITfo

    ral

    coho

    luse

    bhu

    man

    istic

    Cro

    tty(2

    004)

    44m

    ultid

    isci

    plin

    ary

    first

    -tim

    etr

    ansf

    er,l

    ifeex

    pect

    ancy

    1m

    ono

    nelis

    ted

    110

    5644

    (21)

    clin

    ical

    ,hu

    man

    istic

    Dud

    as(2

    001)

    45ph

    arm

    acis

    tsph

    arm

    acy-

    faci

    litat

    eddi

    scha

    rge

    hom

    eho

    mel

    ess,

    non

    Eng

    lish

    spea

    kers

    ,poo

    rph

    one

    orw

    ritte

    n22

    111

    079

    (28)

    clin

    ical

    ,co

    mm

    unic

    atio

    nhu

    man

    istic

    Fin

    ley

    (200

    3)46

    mul

    tidis

    cipl

    inar

    yde

    pres

    sion

    ,sta

    rtin

    gan

    tidep

    ress

    antt

    hera

    pyan

    tidep

    ress

    antu

    se6

    mo

    prio

    r,co

    ncur

    rent

    psyc

    hiat

    ricor

    125

    75no

    tcle

    arE

    CH

    Ops

    ycho

    logi

    calt

    reat

    men

    t,ac

    tive

    subs

    tanc

    eab

    useb

    Fis

    cher

    (200

    2)56

    phar

    mac

    ists

    hear

    tor

    lung

    dise

    ase,

    spec

    ific

    med

    icat

    ions

    deat

    h,di

    senr

    ollm

    ent,

    orno

    pres

    crip

    tion

    bene

    fitb

    1070

    444

    notc

    lear

    EC

    HO

    Jabe

    r(1

    996)

    47ph

    arm

    acis

    tsty

    pe2

    diab

    etes

    men

    tali

    ncom

    pete

    nce,

    nonu

    rban

    Afr

    ican

    Am

    eric

    an15

    623

    17(2

    6)cl

    inic

    al,

    ethn

    icity

    ,sev

    eral

    spec

    ific

    com

    orbi

    ditie

    sbhu

    man

    istic

    Kue

    hl(1

    998)

    13m

    ultid

    isci

    plin

    ary

    nopr

    evio

    usen

    rollm

    enti

    ncu

    rren

    tstu

    dyb

    rece

    ivin

    gtr

    eatm

    entf

    orH

    IV,d

    rug-

    oral

    coho

    l-rel

    ated

    156

    7854

    (23)

    hum

    anis

    ticill

    ness

    ,men

    tali

    llnes

    s;un

    der

    obst

    etric

    care

    com

    plex

    Mur

    ray

    (200

    4)48

    mul

    tidis

    cipl

    inar

    ych

    roni

    che

    artf

    ailu

    re,s

    peci

    ficm

    edic

    atio

    ns,E

    nglis

    h-un

    will

    ing

    tore

    spon

    dto

    ques

    tions

    ,pro

    vide

    cons

    ent,

    or31

    412

    212

    2(0

    )E

    CH

    Osp

    eaki

    ng;a

    dequ

    ate

    men

    tals

    tatu

    san

    dhe

    arin

    gbus

    esp

    ecia

    lmed

    icat

    ion

    cont

    aine

    rs

    Nic

    kers

    onph

    arm

    acis

    tsfa

    mily

    -pra

    ctic

    epa

    tient

    ,dis

    char

    ged

    hom

    ebe

    twee

    nno

    tabl

    eto

    resp

    ond

    tosu

    rvey

    orno

    tava

    ilabl

    efo

    r25

    313

    413

    4(0

    )cl

    inic

    al,

    (200

    5)49

    0800

    and

    1400

    hour

    sw

    ith1

    drug

    bfo

    llow

    -upb

    hum

    anis

    tic

    Pau

    los

    (200

    5)50

    phar

    mac

    ists

    curr

    entt

    reat

    men

    tfor

    dysl

    ipid

    emia

    com

    mun

    icat

    ion

    diffi

    culti

    es,p

    regn

    ancy

    ,sel

    f-m

    edic

    atio

    n42

    2322

    (4)

    clin

    ical

    ,no

    tcle

    arhu

    man

    istic

    Rot

    hman

    mul

    tidis

    cipl

    inar

    ypo

    orco

    ntro

    loft

    ype

    2di

    abet

    es,E

    nglis

    h-sp

    eaki

    ng,

    none

    liste

    d28

    511

    299

    (11)

    clin

    ical

    ,(2

    005)

    51>

    6m

    olif

    eex

    pect

    ancy

    hum

    anis

    tic

    AU

    DIT

    =A

    lcoh

    olU

    seD

    isor

    ders

    Iden

    tific

    atio

    nTe

    st;E

    CH

    O=

    Eco

    nom

    ic/C

    linic

    al/H

    uman

    istic

    /Out

    com

    e;P

    rime-

    MD

    =P

    rimar

    yC

    are

    Eva

    luat

    ion

    ofM

    enta

    lDis

    orde

    r.a P

    atie

    ntag

    ew

    as18

    year

    sor

    olde

    r.bO

    ther

    crite

    riaal

    so.

    (con

    tinue

    don

    page

    684)

    at University of Victoria on May 26, 2014aop.sagepub.comDownloaded from

    http://aop.sagepub.com/

  • most consistent clarity. These researchers conducted theirstudies in Canada, the Netherlands, the US, and Australia,respectively; all of these studies were conducted in com-munity pharmacies. The poor clarity of reporting in severalother studies markedly affected the availability of data forreview purposes, study replication, and intervention appli-cation.

    RESEARCH COLLABORATION AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY

    TEAMS

    The involvement and collaboration of multidisciplinaryteams did not obviously differentiate groups in any otherway from the intradisciplinary studies. However, the lackof collaboration did markedly affect one study that did notreport any substantial outcomes. Bungay et al.42 conducteda pharmacist-only study in a group of medical specialtyclinics and recruited primary care patients who were takingantidepressants. The pharmacists found that they were un-able to fulfill the patients tremendous unmet (psychoso-cial) care needs and that a targeted approach to medica-tion-related needs, by any one healthcare profession, wasunsatisfactory. The study limitations were reported in de-tail for the benefit of future researchers and practitioners.

    UTILITY OF THE WORKING DEFINITION OF CONTINUITY OF

    CARE

    Of the 11 articles that clearly contained the phrase conti-nuity of care or one of its synonyms, 3 studies defined ordescribed the concept.13,38,49 None of the 3 definitions indi-cated whose perspective of continuity of care was beingresearched; 2 studies indicated that patient care should beongoing and reported how optimal patient care would beachieved.38,49 Each of the 3 studies indicated how manage-ment of disruptive issues was envisaged. The working def-inition used in this review served well as a baseline foridentification of the 4 essential components of continuityof care.

    SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH

    Studies that reported statistically significant changes inpatients disease states or medication management includ-ed research on diabetes; dyslipidemia; hypertension orchronic heart failure and cardiovascular drugs; and depres-sion and nontricyclic antidepressants or benzodiaze-pines.39-41,45-47,51-53,56,57 Studies in the patient and informationtransfer group also reported statistically significant changewhen researchers endeavored to optimize medication regi-mens, develop a liaison pharmacist role, or test a new sys-tem for efficient information exchange.13,38,44

    Two studies chose not to report their primary outcomesin terms of statistical significance when they investigated

    684 n The Annals of Pharmacotherapy n 2009 April, Volume 43 www.theannals.com

    GR Ellit et al.

    Tabl

    e2.

    Des

    ign

    Cha

    ract

    eris

    tics,

    Sam

    ple

    Siz

    e,an

    dP

    ropo

    sed

    End

    poin

    tCat

    egor

    yof

    Rev

    iew

    edS

    tudi

    es(c

    ontin

    ued)

    Fin

    alP

    rop

    ose

    dS

    ub

    ject

    sIn

    itia

    lIn

    terv

    enti

    on

    En

    dp

    oin

    tsH

    ealt

    hca

    reR

    ecru

    ited

    ,In

    terv

    enti

    on

    Gro

    up

    ,n(E

    CH

    OR

    efer

    ence

    Pro

    fess

    ion

    als

    Incl

    usi

    on

    Cri

    teri

    aaE

    xclu

    sio

    nC

    rite

    ria

    NG

    rou

    p,n

    (%at

    triti

    on

    )ca

    teg

    ory

    )

    Sel

    lors

    (200

    3)54

    mul

    tidis

    cipl

    inar

    yta

    king

    5m

    edic

    atio

    ns,h

    adph

    ysic

    ian

    visi

    t