Pharmacy World and Science

, Volume 25, Issue 5, pp 218–226 | Cite as

Community pharmacy based provision of pharmaceutical care to older patients

  • I.K. Sturgess
  • J.C. McElnay
  • C.M. Hughes
  • G. Crealey


Aim: To measure the outcomes of a harmonised, structured pharmaceutical care programme provided to elderly patients by community pharmacists.Method: A randomised, controlled, longitudinal, clinical trial with repeated measures was performed over an 18‐month period, involving community pharmacies (5 intervention and 5 control) in Northern Ireland. Elderly, ambulatory patients (≥ 65 years), taking 4 or more prescribed medications were eligible for participation. Patients attending an intervention pharmacy received education on medical conditions, implementation of compliance strategies, rationalising of drug regimens and appropriate monitoring; patients attending control sites received normal services. A battery of clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes were assessed.Results: A significantly higher proportion of intervention patients were compliant at the end of the 18‐month study and experienced fewer problems with medication compared to control patients (P < 0.05). There was little impact on quality of life and health care utilisation.Conclusions: Pharmaceutical care provision to community‐dwelling patients resulted in an improvement in medication compliance and evidence of cost‐savings. Future pharmaceutical care studies may benefit from a more focussed selective approach to data collection and outcomes measurement.

Community pharmacy Elderly Northern Ireland Pharmaceutical care Randomised controlled trial 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dall JLC. The greying of Europe. BMJ 1994; 309: 1282–5.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yuen P. Compendium of health statistics 1999. 11th ed. London: Office of Health Economics.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weedle P, Parish P. Pharmaceutical care of the elderly. Part 1. The extent of drug use in the elderly. Br J Pharm Pract 1984; 6: 352–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hale WE, Perkins LL, May FE, Marks RG, Stewart RB. Symptom prevalence in the elderly: an evaluation of age, sex, disease and medication usage. J Am Geriatr Soc 1986; 34: 333–40Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stewart RB. Polypharmacy in the elderly: a fait accompli? Ann Pharmacother 1990; 24: 321-3Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Royal College of Physicians Medication for older people, 2nd ed. 1997. London: Royal College of Physicians, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnson JA, Bootman JL. Drug-related morbidity and mortality. A cost-of-illness model. Arch Intern Med 1995; 155: 1949–56.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wade WE, Cobb HH, Cooper JW. Drug-related problems in a multiple site ambulatory geriatric population. J Geriatr Drug Ther 1986; 1: 67–79.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berardo DH, Kimberlin CL, McKenzie LC, Pendergast JF. Community pharmacists' documentation of interventions on drug-related problems of elderly patients. J Soc Admin Pharm 1994; 11: 182–93Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Westerlund T, Almarsdottris AB, Melander A. Factors influencing the detection rate of drug-related problems in community pharmacy. Pharm World Sci 1999; 21: 245–50.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lindley CM, Tully MO, Paramsothy V, Tallis RC. Inappropriate medication is a major cause of adverse drug reactions in elderly patients. Age Ageing 1992; 21: 294–300.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hanlon JT, Weinberger M, Samsa GP, Schmader KE, Uttech KM, Lewis IK et al. A randomized controlled trial of a clinical pharmacist intervention to improve inappropriate prescribing in elderly out-patients with polypharmacy. Am J Med 1996; 100: 428–37.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roughead EE, Gilbert AL, Primrose JG, Sansom LN. Drug-related hospital admissions: A review of Australian studies published 1988–1996. Med J Aust 1998; 168: 405–8.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hepler CD, Strand LM. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. Am J Hosp Pharm 1990; 47: 533–42.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kennie NR, Schuster BG, Einarson TR. Critical analysis of the pharmaceutical care research literature. Ann Pharmacother 1998; 32: 17–26.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grymonpre RE, Williamson DA, Huynh DH, Desilets LM. A community-based pharmaceutical care model for the elderly: report on a pilot study. Int J Pharm Pract 1994; 2: 229–34Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burgess J, White GN. A PC project with the elderly. Pharm Pract 1996; 12: 61–9.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maguire TA. Pharmaceutical care - who pays? Pharm J 1995; 254: 642.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Holford DA, Smith S. Improving the quality of outcomes research involving pharmaceutical services. Am J Health System Pharm 1997; 54: 1434–42.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bernsten C, Bjorkman I, Caramona M, Crealey G, Frokjaer B, Grundberger E et al. Improving the well-being of elderly patients via community pharmacy-based provision of pharmaceutical care. Drugs Aging 2001; 18: 63–77.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gore SM. Assessing clinical trials-restricted randomisation. BMJ 1981; 282: 2114–7.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    March G, Gilbert A, Roughead E, Quintrell N. Developing and evaluating a model for pharmaceutical care in Australian community pharmacies. Int J Pharmacy Pract 1999; 7: 220–9.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strand LM, Morley PC. Drug-related problems. Their structure and function. Drug Intell Clin Pharm 1990; 24: 1093–7.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lobas NH, Lepinski PW, Abramowitz PW. Effects of pharmaceutical care on medication cost and quality of patient care in an ambulatory care clinic. Am J Hosp Pharm 1992; 49: 1681–8.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hammerström B, Wessling A, Nilsson JLG. Pharmaceutical care for patients with skin diseases: a campaign year at Swedish pharmacies. J Clin Pharm Ther 1995; 20: 327–44.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Grainger-Rousseau TJ, McElnay JC. A model for community pharmacy involvement with general practitioners in the management of asthmatic patients. J Appl Ther 1996; 1: 145–61.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Herborg H, Søndergaard B, Frokjaer B, Fonnesboek L, Gutafsson T, Hepler C. Pharmaceutical care value proved. Int Pharm J 1996; 10: 167–8.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schulz M, Verheyen F, Muhlig S, Muller JM, Muhlbauer K, Knop-Schneickert EK et al. Pharmaceutical care services for asthma patients: a controlled intervention study. J Clin Pharmacol 2001; 41: 668–76.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Van Veldhuisen-Scott MK, Widmer LB, Stacey SA, Popovich NG. Developing and implementing a pharmaceutical care model in a ambulatory care setting for patients with diabetes. Diab Educ 1995; 21: 117–24.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Park JJ, Kelly P, Carter BL, Burgess PB. Comprehensive pharmaceutical care in the chain setting. J Am Pharm Assoc 1996; 36: 443–51.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Erickson SR, Slaughter R, Halapy H. Pharmacists' ability to influence outcomes of hypertension therapy. Pharmacotherapy 1997; 17: 140–7.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bogden PE, Abbott RD, Williamson P, Onopa JK, Koontz LM. Comparing standard care with a physician and pharmacist team approach for uncontrolled hypertension. J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13: 740–5.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bogden PE, Koontz LM, Williamson P, Abbott RD. The physician and pharmacist team. An effective approach to cholesterol reduction. J Gen Intern Med 1997; 12: 158–64Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roland M, Torgerson DJ. Understanding clinical trials: what are pragmatic trials? BMJ 1998; 316: 285.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rogers S, Humphrey C, Nazareth I, Lister S, Tomlin Z, Haines A. Designing trials of interventions to change professional practice in primary care: lessons from an exploratory study of two change strategies. BMJ 2000; 320: 1580–3.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wilson S, Delaney BC, Roalfe A, Roberts L, Redman V, Wearn AM et al. Randomised controlled trials in primary care. BMJ 2000; 321: 24–7.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Roland M, Torgerson DJ. Understanding controlled trials. What outcomes should be measured? BMJ 1998; 317: 1075.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hanlon JT, Artz MB. Drug-related problems and pharmaceutical care. What are they, do they matter and what's next? Med Care 2001; 39: 109–12.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cody M, McCombs JS, Parker JP. The Kaiser Permanante/USC patient consultation study: change in quality of life. Am J Health System Pharm 1998; 55: 2615–20.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Malone DC, Carter BL, Billups SJ, Valuck RJ, Barnette DJ, Sintek CD et al. Can clinical pharmacists affect SF-36 scores in veterans at high risk for medication-related problems? Med Care 2001; 39: 113–22.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ellerby DA, Williams A, Winfield AJ. The level of interest in pharmacy practice research among community pharmacists. Pharm J 1993; 251: 321–2.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    McNeely EA, Clements SD. Recruitment and retention of the older adult into research studies. J Neurosci Studies 1994; 26: 57–61.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bell HM, McElnay JC, Hughes CM, Woods A. A qualitative investigation of the attitudes and opinions of community pharmacists to pharmaceutical care. J Soc Admin Pharm 1998; 15: 284–95.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nimmo CM, Holland RW. Transitions in pharmacy practice, part 2: who does what and why. Am J Health System Pharm 1999; 56: 1981–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • I.K. Sturgess
    • 1
  • J.C. McElnay
    • 1
  • C.M. Hughes
    • 1
  • G. Crealey
    • 1
  1. 1.Clinical and Practice Research Group, The School of PharmacyQueen's University Belfast, Medical Biology CentreBelfastNorthern Ireland

Personalised recommendations