Carers’ Perspectives on Home Medication Review by a State Hospital in Malaysia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31436/ijcs.v5i1.236Keywords:
home care services, allied health personnel, caregivers, healthy ageing, COVID-19Abstract
Introduction: Home Medications Review (HMR) is a continuation of patient care from healthcare facilities to their home to assess patients’ pharmacotherapy by a multidisciplinary team. To improve the provision, we need to understand carers’ viewpoints of the current service. This study aims to explore the carers’ perspectives of HMR conducted by the medical outreach team (MOT) of a Malaysian hospital.
Methods: A qualitative study was conducted among primary caretakers who were involved in the HMR programme for more than six months. Subjects were recruited by purposive sampling from August to December 2019. In-depth interviews were conducted at patients’ home, until data saturation. The audio-recording were transcribed verbatim, subsequently underwent thematic analysis.
Results: Nine carers were interviewed. All participants had a limited understanding of HMR as they claimed not being adequately counselled prior to admission to the programme. The convenience of not having to go to the hospital was perceived as the major benefit of the programme. Healthcare providers were welcomed during visits. Some carers have trouble identifying allied health professionals in the MOT. There was a concern about having to collect newly add-on medications from the hospital. Some participants suggested increasing the frequency of visits and hoping for more financial aid.
Conclusion: In this study, carers’ comprehension of HMR was generally poor. All carers were satisfied with our HMR programme. However, several aspects need to be strengthened to improve patients’ wellbeing. Despite HMR being temporarily replaced by telemedicine during the current pandemic, HMR remains relevant in the post-COVID-19 era.
References
Ministry of Health Malaysia. Home Care Pharmacy Services Protocol 2nd ed. Putrajaya: Ministry of Health Malaysia; 2019.
Council of Europe. Resolution ResAP (2001)2 concerning the pharmacist's role in the framework of health security (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 March 2001 at the 746th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies) [cited 2021 Aug 30]. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/168050af58
Castelino RL, Bajorek BV, Chen TF. Retrospective evaluation of home medicines review by pharmacists in older Australian patients using the medication appropriateness index. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 2010; 44(12), 1922-1929. doi:10.1345/aph.1P373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1P373
Chandrasekhar D, Joseph E, Ghaffoor FA, Thomas HM. Role of pharmacist led home medication review in community setting and the preparation of medication list. Clinical Epidemiology and Global Health, 2019; 7(1), 66-70. doi:10.1016/j.cegh.2018.01.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2018.01.002
Chen TF. Pharmacist-led home medicines review and residential medication management review: the Australian model. Drugs Aging, 2016; 33(3), 199–204. doi:10.1007/s40266-016-0357-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-016-0357-2
Macaulay S, Saulnier L, Gould O. Provision of clinical pharmacy services in the home to patients recently discharged from hospital: a pilot project. Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 2008; 61, 103-113.
Nor Elina A, Che Suraya MZ, Ball PA. The Impact Of Home Medication Review In Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Living In Rural Areas Of Kuantan, Malaysia. Value in Health, 2014; 17(3), A127. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.03.736. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.03.736
Barry MJ, Edgman-Levitan S. Shared decision making — The pinnacle of patient-centred care. New England Journal of Medicine, 2012; 366(9), 780-781. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1109283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1109283
Bergeson, SC, Dean, JD. A systems approach to patient-centered care. JAMA, 2006; 296(23), 2848-2851. doi:10.1001/jama.296.23.2848. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.23.2848
Ahn J, Park J, Anthony C, Burke M. Understanding, benefits and difficulties of home medicines review – patients’ perspectives. Australian Family Physician, 2015; 44, 249-253.
White L, Klinner C, Carter S. Consumer perspectives of the Australian home medicines review program: Benefits and barriers. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 2012; 8(1), 4-16. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2010.11.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2010.11.003
Carter SR, Chen TF, White L. Home medicines reviews: a quantitative study of the views of recipients and eligible non-recipients. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 2012; 20(4), 209-217. doi:10.1111/j.2042-7174.2011.00180.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7174.2011.00180.x
Volume CI, Farris KB, Kassam R, Cox CE, Cave A. Pharmaceutical care research and education project: patient outcomes. Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association, 2001; 41(3), 411-420. doi:10.1016/S1086-5802(16)31255-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1086-5802(16)31255-4
Carter SR, Moles R, White L, Chen TF. Patients’ willingness to use a pharmacist-provided medication management service: the influence of outcome expectancies and communication efficacy. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 2012; 8(6), 487-498. doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2012.01.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2012.01.002
Hawes EM, Maxwell WD, White SF, Mangun J, Lin FC. Impact of an outpatient pharmacist intervention on medication discrepancies and health care resource utilisation in posthospitalisation care transitions. Journal of Primary Care Community Health, 2014; 5(1), 14–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2150131913502489
