The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
Exploring the implementation and integration of structured medication reviews in primary care: a qualitative evaluation using normalisation process theory.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Reidy Claire, Seeley Anna, Tucker Katherine, Agwunobi Adaku, Bateman Paul A, Clark Christopher Elles, Clegg Andrew Paul, Ford Gary A, Gadhia Seema, Hinton William, Hobbs Fd Richard, Jawad Sundus, Khunti Kamlesh, Lip Gregory Yh, de Lusignan Simon, Mant Jonathan, McCahon Deborah, Meza-Torres Bernardo, Payne Rupert A, Perera-Salazar Rafael, Seidu Samuel, Sheppard James, Williams Marney, Wright Drakesmith Cynthia, McManus Richard J, Barnes Rebecca K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Structured medication reviews (SMRs) were introduced into primary care in England in 2020 for patients living with multiple long-term conditions (MLTC), polypharmacy, increased frailty, in care homes, or at risk of medicines-related harm. SMRs aim to optimise the therapeutic potential of medication and reduce medicine-related harms through holistic reviews.
AIM: To explore the day-to-day work being undertaken with, and by, clinical pharmacists to implement, embed, and integrate SMRs into practice, and consider how to optimise SMRs.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative one-to-one interviews with clinical pharmacists undertaking SMRs and SMR service leaders/managers (SMR leads) in England between February 2023 and November 2024.
METHOD: Participants were recruited as part of a wider evaluation of the roll-out of SMRs in England. Interview topic guides and qualitative data analysis were informed by normalisation process theory.
RESULTS: Eighteen clinical pharmacists and five SMR leads participated. Participants reported often having to explain the purpose of SMRs and clinical pharmacists' roles to patients, partly owing to patients not being informed about SMRs. Participants valued SMRs and expressed that trust-building and tailored consultations were important for optimising medications. Integration of SMRs into routine practice varied because of high workload, inconsistent leadership support, inadequate administrative/pharmacist technician resource, and lack of training. However, participants described SMRs as valuable for identifying and addressing unmet needs and supporting holistic, person-centred care across MLTC pathways.
CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate the need for improved information on SMRs for patients and primary care teams, adequate and appropriate resource allocation, and enhanced support for consultation skills training to optimise medicines use.
AIM: To explore the day-to-day work being undertaken with, and by, clinical pharmacists to implement, embed, and integrate SMRs into practice, and consider how to optimise SMRs.
DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative one-to-one interviews with clinical pharmacists undertaking SMRs and SMR service leaders/managers (SMR leads) in England between February 2023 and November 2024.
METHOD: Participants were recruited as part of a wider evaluation of the roll-out of SMRs in England. Interview topic guides and qualitative data analysis were informed by normalisation process theory.
RESULTS: Eighteen clinical pharmacists and five SMR leads participated. Participants reported often having to explain the purpose of SMRs and clinical pharmacists' roles to patients, partly owing to patients not being informed about SMRs. Participants valued SMRs and expressed that trust-building and tailored consultations were important for optimising medications. Integration of SMRs into routine practice varied because of high workload, inconsistent leadership support, inadequate administrative/pharmacist technician resource, and lack of training. However, participants described SMRs as valuable for identifying and addressing unmet needs and supporting holistic, person-centred care across MLTC pathways.
CONCLUSION: The findings demonstrate the need for improved information on SMRs for patients and primary care teams, adequate and appropriate resource allocation, and enhanced support for consultation skills training to optimise medicines use.