Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Drug-related problems in diabetes and transplant patients: an observational study with home visits

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives To get insight into the medication management of diabetes type 2 (DM) as well as solid organ transplant (Tx) patients and to analyse drug-related problems (DRPs) in order to explore opportunities for the provision of pharmaceutical care. Setting Seventy-nine Swiss community pharmacies offering internships for pharmacy students. Methods Diabetes and transplant patients were recruited in community pharmacies and were interviewed at home by fifth-year pharmacy students who were supervised by a trained investigator, using a specific interview guide developed for this study. Main outcome measure Pattern and frequency of DRPs and pattern of medication management. Results In total, 22 (Tx patients) and 54 (DM patients) home visits were carried out. Mean age of visited patients was 71.4 ± 8.1 years (DM) and 52.6 ± 13.8 years (Tx). Overall, 37.0% (DM) and 50.0% (Tx) of participants were female. We identified 7.4 ± 2.4 (mean ± SD) DRPs per visited patient, with considerable differences between Tx and DM patients (6.3 ± 1.7 vs. 7.8 ± 2.5). The most frequent DRPs were risk for non-adherence (DM: 61.1%; Tx: 77.3%), confusion of generic and trade names (DM: 74.1%; Tx: 27.3%), hoarding of over-the-counter medicines (DM: 48.1%; Tx: 4.5%) and prescription-only medicines (DM: 37.0%; Tx: 36.4%), gaps in knowledge about potential interactions (DM: 61.1%; Tx: 18.2%) and purpose of drugs (DM: 48.1%; Tx: 36.4%). Mean (SD) duration of the visits was 51.7 ± 21.4 min. Conclusion Visiting Tx and DM patients in their homes allowed the identification of a wide range of opportunities for pharmaceutical care as well as specific DRPs which most probably would have escaped a medication review in the pharmacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pacini M, Smith RD, Wilson EC, Holland R. Home-based medication review in older people: is it cost effective? PharmacoEconomics. 2007;25(2):171–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shaw J, Seal R, Pilling M. Room for review: a guide to medication review: the agenda for patients, practitioners and managers. London: Medicines Partnership; ISBN 0 9544028 0 4; 2002.

  3. Stafford AC, Tenni PC, Peterson GM, Jackson SL, Hejlesen A, Villesen C, et al. Drug-related problems identified in medication reviews by Australian pharmacists. Pharm World Sci. 2009;31(2):216–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Beech E, Brackley K. Medicines management. Part 1: domiciliary based medication for the elderly. Pharm J. 1996;256:620–2.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hsia Der E, Rubenstein LZ, Choy GS. The benefits of in-home pharmacy evaluation for older persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45(2):211–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Read RW, Krska J. Targeted medication review: patients in the community with chronic pain. Int J Pharm Pract. 1998;6:216–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Delate T, Chester EA, Stubbings TW, Barnes CA. Clinical outcomes of a home-based medication reconciliation program after discharge from a skilled nursing facility. Pharmacotherapy. 2008;28(4):444–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Finkers F, Maring JG, Boersma F, Taxis K. A study of medication reviews to identify drug-related problems of polypharmacy patients in the Dutch nursing home setting. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007;32(5):469–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hugtenburg JG, Borgsteede SD, Beckeringh JJ. Medication review and patient counselling at discharge from the hospital by community pharmacists. Pharm World Sci. 2009;31(6):630–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Krahenbuhl JM, Decollogny A, Bugnon O. Using the costs of drug therapy to screen patients for a community pharmacy-based medication review program. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30(6):816–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vuong T, Marriott J, Kong D, Siderov J. Implementation of a community liaison pharmacy service: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Pharm Pract. 2008;16:127–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Holland R, Desborough J, Goodyer L, Hall S, Wright D, Loke YK. Does pharmacist-led medication review help to reduce hospital admissions and deaths in older people? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;65(3):303–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Holland R, Lenaghan E, Harvey I, Smith R, Shepstone L, Lipp A, et al. Does home based medication review keep older people out of hospital? The HOMER randomised controlled trial. Br Med J. 2005;330(7486):293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Krska J, Avery AJ. Evaluation of medication reviews conducted by community pharmacists: a quantitative analysis of documented issues and recommendations. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;65(3):386–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tinelli M, Bond C, Blenkinsopp A, Jaffray M, Watson M, Hannaford P. Patient evaluation of a community pharmacy medications management service. Ann Pharmacother. 2007;41(12):1962–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sorensen L, Stokes JA, Purdie DM, Woodward M, Roberts MS. Medication management at home: medication risk factor prevalence and inter-relationships. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2006;31(5):485–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Haugbolle LS, Sorensen EW. Drug-related problems in patients with angina pectoris, type 2 diabetes and asthma–interviewing patients at home. Pharm World Sci. 2006;28(4):239–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Krska J, Cromarty JA, Arris F, Jamieson D, Hansford D, Duffus PR, et al. Pharmacist-led medication review in patients over 65: a randomized, controlled trial in primary care. Age Ageing. 2001;30(3):205–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ruths S, Straand J, Nygaard HA. Multidisciplinary medication review in nursing home residents: what are the most significant drug-related problems? The Bergen District Nursing Home (BEDNURS) study. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003;12(3):176–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Eichenberger PM, Lampert ML, Vogel Kahmann I, Van Mil JWF, Hersberger KE. Classification of drug-related problems with new prescriptions using a modified PCNE classification system. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(3):362–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Morisky DE, Green LW, Levine DM. Concurrent and predictive validity of a self-reported measure of medication adherence. Med Care. 1986;24(1):67–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. PCNE. The PCNE Classification V 5.01 (2006) [updated 2006; cited 2010 20 Nov]; Available from: http://www.pcne.org/dokumenter/DRP/PCNE%20classification%20V5.01.pdf.

  24. Pharmavista. (2009) Information for Health Care Professionals. e-mediat AG Bern.

  25. Paulino EI, Bouvy ML, Gastelurrutia MA, Guerreiro M, Buurma H. Drug related problems identified by European community pharmacists in patients discharged from hospital. Pharm World Sci. 2004;26(6):353–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sturgess IK, McElnay JC, Hughes CM, Crealey G. Community pharmacy based provision of pharmaceutical care to older patients. Pharm World Sci. 2003;25(5):218–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Roughead EE, Barratt JD, Gilbert AL. Medication-related problems commonly occurring in an Australian community setting. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2004;13(2):83–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Westerlund T, Almarsdottir AB, Melander A. Factors influencing the detection rate of drug-related problems in community pharmacy. Pharm World Sci. 1999;21(6):245–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Morisky DE, Ang A, Krousel-Wood M, Ward HJ. Predictive validity of a medication adherence measure in an outpatient setting. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2008;10(5):348–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jansà M, Hernández C, Vidal M, Nuñez M, Bertran MJ, Sanz S, et al. Multidimensional analysis of treatment adherence in patients with multiple chronic conditions. A cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;81(2):161–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Furnham A. Response bias, social desirability and dissimulation. Person Individ Diff. 1986;7(3):385–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Chisholm MA. Enhancing transplant patients’ adherence to medication therapy. Clin Transplant. 2002;16(1):30–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Caskie G, Willis S, Warner SK, Zanjani F. Congruence of medication information from a brown bag data collection and pharmacy records: findings from the Seattle longitudinal study. Int J Pharm Pract. 2005;32(1):79–103.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nathan A, Goodyer L, Lovejoy A, Rashid A. ‘Brown bag’ medication reviews as a means of optimizing patients’ use of medication and of identifying potential clinical problems. Fam Pract. 1999;16(3):278–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Flavia Gregorini, Barbara Slejska, and Romina Caluori for data collection as well as the owners of the 79 participating pharmacies and the patients who made this study possible.

Funding

No grants from any funding body were received to conduct this study.

Conflicts of interest

No conflict of interest to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, University of Basel, Pharmazentrum, Klingelbergstrasse 50, 4056, Basel, Switzerland

    Patrick M. Eichenberger & Kurt E. Hersberger

  2. Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University Hospital Basel, 4031, Basel, Switzerland

    Manuel Haschke

  3. Clinical and Hospital Pharmacy, Cantonal Hospital Bruderholz, 4101, Bruderholz, Switzerland

    Markus L. Lampert

Authors
  1. Patrick M. Eichenberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manuel Haschke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Markus L. Lampert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kurt E. Hersberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kurt E. Hersberger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eichenberger, P.M., Haschke, M., Lampert, M.L. et al. Drug-related problems in diabetes and transplant patients: an observational study with home visits. Int J Clin Pharm 33, 815–823 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9542-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-011-9542-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation