Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 615–622 | Cite as

Evaluation of a Danish pharmacist student–physician medication review collaboration model

  • Susanne KaaeEmail author
  • Ellen Westh Sørensen
  • Lotte Stig Nørgaard
Research Article

Abstract

Background Interprofessional collaboration between pharmacists and physicians to conduct joint home medication reviews (HMR) is important for optimizing the medical treatment of patients suffering from chronic illnesses. However, collaboration has proved difficult to achieve. The HMR programme “Medisam” was launched in 2009 at the University of Copenhagen with the aim of “developing, implementing and evaluating a collaboration model for HMRs and medicine reconciliations in Denmark”. The Medisam programme involves patients, pharmacy internship students, the (pharmacist) supervisor of the pharmacy students and physicians. Objective To explore if it was possible through the Medisam programme to obtain a fruitful HMR collaboration between pharmacy internship students and physicians as a means to develop HMR collaboration between trained pharmacists and physicians further. Setting Ten matching pairs of student–physician collaboration were studied across Denmark. Method Semi-structured interviews about existing collaboration were conducted with pharmacy internship students in the HMR programme, their supervisors and physicians partners. The theoretical framework forming the analyses was derived especially from works of Bradley et al. (Res Soc Adm Pharm 8:36–46, 2012), and Snyder et al. (Res Soc Adm Pharm 6:307–23, 2010) on pharmacists/physician collaboration. Main outcome measure The development of inter-professional collaboration between students and physicians according to the three collaboration drivers: trustworthiness, role specification and professional interaction. Results Full collaboration was not achieved. Physicians found collaboration satisfactory, students however expressed the need of more interaction with physicians. The written collaboration contracts did not ensure a possible need of students to re-negotiate roles and tasks, and did therefore not entirely ensure role specification. Developing mutual professional interdependence through students being recognized by physicians to contribute to improved patient outcomes was also limited. Conclusion Some challenges to fruitful collaboration were identified. Solutions to these challenges include students and their pharmacist supervisors to find ways to present their collaborative needs to physicians and for students to illustrate more explicitly the benefits patient achieve if physicians implement the recommendations of students.

Keywords

Collaboration Denmark Home medication review Pharmacy students 

Notes

Funding

This programme was supported financially by The Danish Ministry of Health.

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Krass I, Taylor SJ, Armour CL. Impact of medication use and adherence of Australian pharmacists’ diabetes care services. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2005;45:33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Krass I, Smith C. Impact of medication regimen reviews peformed by community pharmacists for ambulatory patients through liaison with general practitioners. Int J Pharm Pract. 2008;8:111–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sorensen L, Stokes JA, Purdie DM, Woodward M, Elliott R, Roberts MS. Medication reviews in the community: results of a randomized, controlled effectiveness trial. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;58(6):648–64.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zermansky AG, Petty DR, Raynor DK, Freemantle N, Vail A, Lowe CJ. Randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist of elderly patients receiving repeat prescriptions in general practice. BMJ. 2001;323:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Howard M, Trim K, Woodward C, Dolovich L, Sellors C, Kaczorowski J. Collaboration between community pharmacists and family physicians: lessons learned from the Seniors Medication Assessment Research Trial. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2003;43(5):566–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pojskic N, MacKeigan LD, Book H, Ellison P, Breslin C. Ontario family physician readiness to collaborate with community pharmacists on drug therapy management. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2011;7:39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Snyder ME, Zillich AJ, Primack BA, Rice KR, Somma McGiney MA, Pringle JL, et al. Exploring successful community pharmacist–physician collaborative working relationships using mixed methods. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2010;6(4):307–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Muijrers PEM, Knottnerus JA, Sijbrandij J, Janknegt R, Grol RP. Changing relationships: attitudes and opinions of general practitioners and pharmacists regarding the role of the community pharmacist. Pharm World Sci. 2003;25(5):234–41.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    McGrath SH, Snyder ME, Duenas GG, Pringle JL, Smith RB, McGivney MS. Physician perceptions of pharmacist-provided medication therapy management: qualitative analysis. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2003;50(1):67–71.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doucette WR, Nevins J, McDonough RP. Drivers affecting collaborative care between pharmacists and physicians. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2005;1(4):565–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Halvorsen KH. Drug prescribing quality for older patients. Explicit indicators and multidisciplinary medication reviews (dissertation). Bergen: University of Bergen; 2012. p. 68.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sørensen EW, Haugbølle LS. Using an action research process in pharmacy practice research—a coorporative programme between university and internship pharmacies. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2008;4:384–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McDonough RP, Doucette WR. Developing collaborative working relationships between pharmacists and physicians. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2001;41(5):682–92.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zillich AJ, McDonough RP, Carter BL, Doucette WR. Influential characteristics of physician/pharmacist collaborative relationships. Ann Pharmacother. 2004;38:764–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bradley F, Ashcroft DM, Noyce PR. Intergration and differentiation: a conceptual model of general practitioner and community pharmacist collaboration. Res Soc Adm Pharm. 2012;8:36–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wüstman AF, Haase-Strey C, Kuniak T, Ritter CA. Cooperation between community pharmacies and general practitioners in eastern Germany: attitudes and needs. Int J Clin Pharm. 2013;35:584–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cooper RJ, Bissell P, Wingfield J. Islands and ‘doctors’ tools; the ethical significance of isolation and subordination in UK community pharmacy. Health. 2009;13(3):297–316.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaae S, Sørensen EW, Haugbølle LS. Exploring communication around medication review in community pharmacy. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33:529–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Freeman CR, Cottrell WN, Kyle G, Williams ID, Nissen L. An evaluation of medication review reports across different settings. Int J Clin Pharm. 2013;35:5–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij ter bevordering der Pharmacie 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susanne Kaae
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ellen Westh Sørensen
    • 1
  • Lotte Stig Nørgaard
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medical SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen ØDenmark

Personalised recommendations