Traditionally pharmacists actively recruit patients to medicines use reviews, designed to address adherence through information provision, which have had variable success. Encouraging patients to identify their information needs and self-present for an MUR may improve patient satisfaction and service outcomes. Using previous evidence, a card was developed to encourage patients to identify their any information needs and seek support through an MUR. The aim of this pilot study was to implement the card and test both its acceptability to patients and pharmacists and identify its potential for enhancing service impact. Institutional ethical approval
was obtained for this service
evaluation. The patient card asked whether they were able to answer any of five questions about their medicines (side effects, RXDX-106 overdose and under dose, interactions, the medicine’s effect and getting the best out of the medicine). All pharmacies in two adjacent counties belonging to one pharmacy chain participated in the evaluation for a 12 week period. Pharmacies in one county (implementation) distributed the cards with repeat medicines for patients who met the criteria for an MUR. Pharmacies in the adjacent county (comparison) did not use the cards. All patients identified as self-presenting for an MUR as a result of receiving a card selleck were given a satisfaction questionnaire post consultation. Comparison
pharmacies distributed a satisfaction questionnaire to the first four MUR patients each week. Pharmacists were not asked to keep track of the number of patients given a card or approached to complete the questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed using two previously validated tools assessing satisfaction with information provision (SIMS) and adherence (MMAS-4). The questionnaire also contained demographic questions and a space for free-type comments. The questionnaire had been used in a previous study and was not piloted before implementation. Pharmacists in the implementation area were interviewed at the end of the study to obtain their thoughts on the use of the cards and was analysed using a framework however approach. Twenty-two implementation and 11 comparison pharmacies participated and cards were actively given out in five pharmacies. 81 questionnaires were returned to the university. Table 1 compares the data received from the two groups and illustrates the relationship between the use of the identification cards and both satisfaction and adherence. Table 1 The impact of providing identification cards to patients on medicines information and adherence Implementation group (n = 31) Comparison group (n = 50) P-value *Fisher’s exact (n = 78); **Mann–Whitney U (n = 69); adherence measured by the MMAS-4.