首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care >General practitioners’ and nurses’ views on medication reviews and potentially inappropriate medicines in elderly patients – a qualitative study of reports by educating pharmacists
【2h】

General practitioners’ and nurses’ views on medication reviews and potentially inappropriate medicines in elderly patients – a qualitative study of reports by educating pharmacists

机译:全科医生和护士对老年患者的药物评论和可能不适当的药物的看法–通过对药剂师的教育进行的定性研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Objective: The aim with this study was to understand more about how general practitioners (GPs) and nurses in primary care experience their work with medication reviews in elderly patients.>Design: This qualitative study was nested within a cluster randomised trial and analysed narrative and unstructured diaries written by two pharmacists who performed academic detailing, i.e. educational outreach visits in primary care. The educational sessions dealt with potentially inappropriate medicines, and stimulated interprofessional dialogue in relation to medication reviews. The purpose of the diaries was to document and structure the pedagogical process of academic detailing and contained quotes from 194 GP and 113 nurse participants in the sessions, and the pharmacists’ reflections. The data was explored using thematic analysis.>Setting: Thirty-three primary care practices in Stockholm, Sweden.>Subjects: GPs and nurses working in primary care.>Main outcome measures: Thematic descriptions of academic detailing by pharmacists.>Results: Five themes were identified: 1) Complexity in 3 ‘P’: patients, pharmacotherapy, and primary care; 2) What, when, who? Clash between GPs’ and nurses’ experiences and guidelines; 3) Real-world problems and less-than-ideal solutions; 4) Eureka? Experiences with different steps during a medication review; and 5) Threats to GP autonomy.>Conclusion: GPs and nurses should participate in the construction and release of guidelines in order to increase their usability in clinical practice. Future research should analyse if alternative strategies such as condensed medical reviews and feedback on prescribing are easier to implement in primary care. style="clear:both">Key points class="unordered" style="list-style-type:disc">Complex medication reviews have been introduced on a large scale in Swedish primary care, but knowledge on GPs’ and nurses’ views on such reviews is lacking.In the context of primary care alternative strategies such as condensed medication reviews and feedback on prescribing may be more applicable than medication reviews according to guidelines.GPs and nurses should make contributions to the development of guidelines on medication reviews in order to increase their usability in clinical practice.
机译:>目的:本研究的目的是更多地了解全科医生(GPs)和初级保健护士如何在老年患者中进行药物复习的体验。>设计:定性研究嵌套在一项整群随机试验中,并分析了两位药剂师撰写的叙述性日记和非结构日记,他们进行了学术上的详细介绍,即初级保健中的教育外访。教育会议处理可能不合适的药物,并促进了与药物审查有关的专业间对话。日记的目的是记录和组织学术细节的教学过程,并包含194名全科医生和113名护士参与者在会议中的名言以及药剂师的反思。使用主题分析对数据进行了研究。>设置:瑞典斯德哥尔摩的33种初级保健实践。>受试者:全科医生和从事初级保健的护士。>主要结果措施:药剂师对学术细节的主题描述。>结果:确定了五个主题:1)3'P'的复杂性:患者,药物治疗和基层医疗; 2)什么,什么时候,谁?全科医生和护士的经验和准则之间的冲突; 3)现实世界中的问题和不理想的解决方案; 4)尤里卡?药物审核过程中不同步骤的经验; 5)对全科医生自主权的威胁。>结论:全科医生和护士应参与指南的制定和发布,以提高他们在临床实践中的可用性。未来的研究应分析是否可以在基层医疗中更容易实施替代策略,例如简明的医学评论和处方反馈。 style =“ clear:both”>要点 class =“ unordered” style =“ list-style-type:disc“> <!-list-behavior = unordered prefix-word = mark-type = disc max-label-size = 0-> 已经全面引入了复杂的药物评价在瑞典的初级保健中,但缺乏对全科医生和护士对此类检查的看法的了解。 在初级保健中,替代策略(例如,简明药物评审和处方反馈)可能比药物更适用 医生和护士应为药物审查指南的制定做出贡献,以增加他们在临床实践中的可用性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号