A systematic review examining the effectiveness of medicines information services for patients and the general public

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives: Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP.
Methods: Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, on 11th August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated.
Key findings: Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (seventeen published articles, fifteen conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51%); risk of bias was high (63%). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g., 94% and 91% of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, advice is reported to be usually followed (94%, and 66% for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g., problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured, and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39% of calls may concern errors), and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48% of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients).
Conclusions: Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be a beneficial source of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.
Registration: PROSPERO CRD42017075165
LanguageEnglish
JournalInternational Journal of Pharmacy Practice
StatusAccepted/In press - 11 Jul 2019

Keywords

  • patient medicines helplines
  • systematic review
  • National Health Service
  • medicines information
  • drug information
  • Hospital pharmacy
  • drug information center

Cite this

@article{92897ce6787f4e718c12f26384758c0e,
title = "A systematic review examining the effectiveness of medicines information services for patients and the general public",
abstract = "Objectives: Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP.Methods: Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, on 11th August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated. Key findings: Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (seventeen published articles, fifteen conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51{\%}); risk of bias was high (63{\%}). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g., 94{\%} and 91{\%} of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, advice is reported to be usually followed (94{\%}, and 66{\%} for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g., problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured, and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39{\%} of calls may concern errors), and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48{\%} of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients).Conclusions: Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be a beneficial source of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.Registration: PROSPERO CRD42017075165",
keywords = "patient medicines helplines, systematic review, National Health Service, medicines information, drug information, Hospital pharmacy, drug information center",
author = "Matthew Williams and Abbie Jordan and Jennifer Scott and Matthew Jones",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "11",
language = "English",
journal = "International Journal of Pharmacy Practice",
issn = "0961-7671",
publisher = "Pharmaceutical Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A systematic review examining the effectiveness of medicines information services for patients and the general public

AU - Williams, Matthew

AU - Jordan, Abbie

AU - Scott, Jennifer

AU - Jones, Matthew

PY - 2019/7/11

Y1 - 2019/7/11

N2 - Objectives: Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP.Methods: Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, on 11th August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated. Key findings: Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (seventeen published articles, fifteen conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51%); risk of bias was high (63%). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g., 94% and 91% of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, advice is reported to be usually followed (94%, and 66% for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g., problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured, and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39% of calls may concern errors), and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48% of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients).Conclusions: Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be a beneficial source of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.Registration: PROSPERO CRD42017075165

AB - Objectives: Hospital-based patient medicines helpline services (PMHS) and medicines information services for the general public (MISGP) are available in many countries to support people with their medicines. Our aim was to examine the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of PMHS and MISGP.Methods: Searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science, on 11th August 2018. Forward and backward citation searches were conducted, grey literature was searched, and study quality/risk of bias was assessed. Findings were synthesised in a narrative synthesis. Where appropriate, weighted means were calculated. Key findings: Thirty-two studies were identified for inclusion (seventeen published articles, fifteen conference abstracts). Eighteen studies were conducted within the United Kingdom. Mean quality assessment was moderate (51%); risk of bias was high (63%). PMHS and MISGP are both typically perceived as positive (e.g., 94% and 91% of participants were satisfied with using a PMHS and MISGP, respectively). For PMHS, advice is reported to be usually followed (94%, and 66% for MISGP). For both services, users report several positive outcomes (e.g., problems resolved/avoided, feeling reassured, and improved health). PMHS may also be effective for correcting medicines-related errors (up to 39% of calls may concern errors), and for potentially avoiding medicines-related harm (48% of enquiries concerned situations that were judged to have the potential to harm patients).Conclusions: Findings suggest that both PMHS and MISGP may be a beneficial source of medicines-related support. However, the moderate quality and high risk of bias of studies highlight that more high-quality research is needed.Registration: PROSPERO CRD42017075165

KW - patient medicines helplines

KW - systematic review

KW - National Health Service

KW - medicines information

KW - drug information

KW - Hospital pharmacy

KW - drug information center

M3 - Article

JO - International Journal of Pharmacy Practice

T2 - International Journal of Pharmacy Practice

JF - International Journal of Pharmacy Practice

SN - 0961-7671

ER -