Ann-Christin Kroenert, Lucas Freyberg, Claudia Sehmisch, Sebastian Michael, Thilo Bertsche
{"title":"Community Pharmacy Service for Patients With Inhaled Medications: A Multi-Perspective Observation and Assessment Under Routine Conditions","authors":"Ann-Christin Kroenert, Lucas Freyberg, Claudia Sehmisch, Sebastian Michael, Thilo Bertsche","doi":"10.1111/jep.70271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Rationale</h3>\n \n <p>Outcome studies have shown the benefits of inhalation consultations. Therefore, the service of inhalation consultations from pharmacists has been implemented in guidelines. Recently, this service became reimbursable for German community pharmacies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>We aimed to investigate how this service is performed under routine conditions to actually achieve the proven benefits.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We evaluated the reimbursed inhalation service under routine conditions in community pharmacies in Saxony, Germany. An external trained monitor observed routine services and documented predefined handling errors in patients' inhalation demonstrations. Besides, the monitor checked which contents of predefined checklists were addressed. After the consultations, patients and pharmaceutical staff were asked about the pervious service via a questionnaire.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We analysed 48 reimbursed inhalation services in 13 different community pharmacies. Most consultations were on metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers, with 42% (20/48) each. We observed a median of <i>n</i> = 2 handling errors per patient (Q25: 1; Q75: 3). On average, 77% of those two errors were addressed by the pharmaceutical staff during the following consultation (95% confidence interval [69%; 86%]; minimum: 0%; maximum: 100%). Overall, patients' contentment with the service was very high (overall median: 5), while pharmaceutical staff's contentment was high (overall median: 4). There was no correlation between duration and unaddressed errors (<i>r</i> = 0.16; <i>p</i> = 0.35) or patients' contentment (<i>r</i> = 0.19; <i>p</i> = 0.26).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Handling errors in patients' inhalation technique were common but mostly recognized and addressed by the pharmaceutical staff during the reimbursed inhalation service. Patients' contentment with the service was high to very high, and they were usually more content with the service than the pharmaceutical staff.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70271","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70271","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Rationale
Outcome studies have shown the benefits of inhalation consultations. Therefore, the service of inhalation consultations from pharmacists has been implemented in guidelines. Recently, this service became reimbursable for German community pharmacies.
Aims
We aimed to investigate how this service is performed under routine conditions to actually achieve the proven benefits.
Methods
We evaluated the reimbursed inhalation service under routine conditions in community pharmacies in Saxony, Germany. An external trained monitor observed routine services and documented predefined handling errors in patients' inhalation demonstrations. Besides, the monitor checked which contents of predefined checklists were addressed. After the consultations, patients and pharmaceutical staff were asked about the pervious service via a questionnaire.
Results
We analysed 48 reimbursed inhalation services in 13 different community pharmacies. Most consultations were on metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers, with 42% (20/48) each. We observed a median of n = 2 handling errors per patient (Q25: 1; Q75: 3). On average, 77% of those two errors were addressed by the pharmaceutical staff during the following consultation (95% confidence interval [69%; 86%]; minimum: 0%; maximum: 100%). Overall, patients' contentment with the service was very high (overall median: 5), while pharmaceutical staff's contentment was high (overall median: 4). There was no correlation between duration and unaddressed errors (r = 0.16; p = 0.35) or patients' contentment (r = 0.19; p = 0.26).
Conclusion
Handling errors in patients' inhalation technique were common but mostly recognized and addressed by the pharmaceutical staff during the reimbursed inhalation service. Patients' contentment with the service was high to very high, and they were usually more content with the service than the pharmaceutical staff.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.