Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 574–576 | Cite as

Exploring elements of interprofessional collaboration between pharmacists and physicians in medication review

  • Timothy F. Chen
  • Abilio C. de Almeida NetoEmail author
Original Paper


In medication review involving community pharmacists and physicians, there is an underlying assumption that if community pharmacists provide evidence based pharmacotherapeutic recommendations, physicians, in turn, will implement these recommendations. However, although in general medication review has been shown to improve the quality of medicine use, medication management plans arising from the medication review process are not always implemented. There is a need for better understanding of the factors that influence outcomes in medication review. The current paper will address some cultural and procedural factors that may assist in understanding outcomes in medication review using research into collaboration from areas outside the healthcare as a framework.


Medication review Interprofessional collaboration Community pharmacist Physician Trust 


  1. 1.
    Australian Government. Department of Health and Ageing. 2005 Domiciliary Medication Management––Home Medicines Review: Helping Your Patients Manage Their Medicines at Home.$FILE/dmmrguidelines.pdf (31 January, 2007).
  2. 2.
    Task Force on Medicines Partnership and the National Collaborative Medicines Management Services Programme. Room for review: a guide to medication review: the agenda for patients, practitioners and managers. Wallingford: Pharmaceutical Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pharmacy Guild of Australia and Australian Divisions of General Practice Limited. 2006 Home Medicines Review: Information for Pharmacy Staff. (10 January 2007).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    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 repeated prescriptions in general practice. BMJ 2001;323:1340–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gilbert A, Roughead EF, Beilby J, Mott K, Barrat JD. Collaborative medication management services: improving patient care. Med J Aust 2002;177:189–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pattison-Gordon L. Best practices in collaborative technology. 1997; (5 March 2000).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vandenbosch B, Ginzberg MJ. Lotus notes and collaboration. J Manag Info Syst 1996;13(3):65–81.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Orlikowski WJ. Learning from notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation. Paper presented at the ACM, Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, Toronto, Canada, 1–4 November 1992.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clark AS, Downing CE, Coleman D. Groupware at big six consulting firms: How successful was it? In: Coleman D, editor. Groupware: collaborative strategies for corporate LAN’s and intranets. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1997. ISBN 013-727728-8.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chen TF, Crampton M, Krass I, Benrimoj SI. Collaboration between community pharmacists and GPs––impact on interprofessional communication. J Soc Admin Pharm 2001;18:83–90.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen TF, Crampton M, Krass I, Benrimoj SI. Collaboration between community pharmacists and GPs––the medication review process. J Soc Admin Pharm 1999;16:145–56.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen TF, Crampton M, Krass I, Benrimoj SI. Collaboration between community pharmacists and GPs in innovative clinical pharmacy services––a conceptual model. J Soc Admin Pharm 1999;16:134–44.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holland R, Smith R, Harvey I. Where now for pharmacist led medication review? J Epidemiol Comm Health 2006;60:92–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Warkentin ME, Sayeed L, Hightower R. Virtual teams versus face-to-face teams: an exploratory study of a web-based conference system. Dec Sci 1997;28(4):975–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Von Krogh G, Nanaka I, Ichijo K. Enabling knowledge creation: how to unlock the mystery of tacit knowledge and release the power of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2000. ISBN-10: 0195126165.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Handy C. Trust and the virtual organization. Harv Bus Rev 1995;73:40–50.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rocco E. Trust breaks down in electronic contexts but can be repaired by some initial face-to-face contact. Paper presented at CHI ′98, Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference, Los Angeles, California, 18–23 April, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of PharmacyThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations