Cargando…

Pharmacist-led management of chronic pain in primary care: results from a randomised controlled exploratory trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of pharmacist medication review, with or without pharmacist prescribing, with standard care, for patients with chronic pain. DESIGN: An exploratory randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Six general practices with prescribing pharmacists in Grampian (3) and Ea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bruhn, Hanne, Bond, Christine M, Elliott, Alison M, Hannaford, Philip C, Lee, Amanda J, McNamee, Paul, Smith, Blair H, Watson, Margaret C, Holland, Richard, Wright, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3641445/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23562814
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002361
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of pharmacist medication review, with or without pharmacist prescribing, with standard care, for patients with chronic pain. DESIGN: An exploratory randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Six general practices with prescribing pharmacists in Grampian (3) and East Anglia (3). PARTICIPANTS: Patients on repeat prescribed pain medication (4815) were screened by general practitioners (GPs), and mailed invitations (1397). 196 were randomised and 180 (92%) completed. Exclusion criteria included: severe mental illness, terminally ill, cancer related pain, history of addiction. RANDOMISATION AND INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised using a remote telephone service to: (1) pharmacist medication review with face-to-face pharmacist prescribing; (2) pharmacist medication review with feedback to GP and no planned patient contact or (3) treatment as usual (TAU). Blinding was not possible. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were the SF-12v2, the Chronic Pain Grade (CPG), the Health Utilities Index 3 and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Outcomes were collected at 0, 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: In the prescribing arm (n=70) two patients were excluded/nine withdrew. In the review arm (n=63) one was excluded/three withdrew. In the TAU arm (n=63) four withdrew. Compared with baseline, patients had an improved CPG in the prescribing arm, 47.7% (21/44; p=0.003) and in the review arm, 38.6% (17/44; p=0.001), but not the TAU group, 31.3% (15/48; ns). The SF-12 Physical Component Score showed no effect in the prescribing or review arms but improvement in TAU (p=0.02). The SF-12 Mental Component Score showed no effect for the prescribing or review arms and deterioration in the TAU arm (p=0.002). HADS scores improved within the prescribing arm for depression (p=0.022) and anxiety (p=0.007), between groups (p=0.022 and p=0.045, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomised controlled trial of pharmacist prescribing in the UK, and suggests that there may be a benefit for patients with chronic pain. A larger trial is required. Trial registration: www.isrctn.org/ISRCTN06131530. Medical Research Council funding.