Cargando…

Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceived acceptability, advantages and disadvantages of electronic multicompartment medication devices. DESIGN: Qualitative study using 8 focus groups and 10 individual semistructured interviews. Recordings were transcribed and analysed thematically. Strategies were emplo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hall, Jill, Bond, Christine, Kinnear, Moira, McKinstry, Brian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5073531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27798025
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012915
_version_ 1782461594636124160
author Hall, Jill
Bond, Christine
Kinnear, Moira
McKinstry, Brian
author_facet Hall, Jill
Bond, Christine
Kinnear, Moira
McKinstry, Brian
author_sort Hall, Jill
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceived acceptability, advantages and disadvantages of electronic multicompartment medication devices. DESIGN: Qualitative study using 8 focus groups and 10 individual semistructured interviews. Recordings were transcribed and analysed thematically. Strategies were employed to ensure the findings were credible and trustworthy. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Community pharmacists (n=11), general practitioners (n=9), community nurses (n=12) and social care managers (n=8) were recruited from the National Health Service (NHS) and local authority services. Patients (n=15) who were current conventional or electronic multicompartment medication device users or had medication adherence problems were recruited from community pharmacies. 3 informal carers participated. RESULTS: Electronic multicompartment medication devices which prompt the patient to take medication may be beneficial for selected individuals, particularly those with cognitive impairment, but who are not seriously impaired, provided they have a good level of dexterity. They may also assist individuals where it is important that medication is taken at fixed time intervals. These are likely to be people who are being supported to live alone. No single device suited everybody; smaller/lighter devices were preferred but their usefulness was limited by the small number/size of storage compartments. Removing medications was often challenging. Transportability was an important factor for patients and carers. A carer's alert if medication is not taken was problematic with multiple barriers to implementation and no consensus as to who should receive the alert. There was a lack of enthusiasm among professionals, particularly among pharmacists, due to concerns about responsibility and funding for devices as well as ensuring devices met regulatory standards for storage and labelling. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides indicators of which patients might benefit from an electronic multicompartment medication device as well as the kinds of features to consider when matching a patient with a device. It also highlights other considerations for successful implementation including issues of responsibility, regulation and funding.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5073531
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50735312016-11-07 Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study Hall, Jill Bond, Christine Kinnear, Moira McKinstry, Brian BMJ Open Qualitative Research OBJECTIVES: To explore the perceived acceptability, advantages and disadvantages of electronic multicompartment medication devices. DESIGN: Qualitative study using 8 focus groups and 10 individual semistructured interviews. Recordings were transcribed and analysed thematically. Strategies were employed to ensure the findings were credible and trustworthy. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Community pharmacists (n=11), general practitioners (n=9), community nurses (n=12) and social care managers (n=8) were recruited from the National Health Service (NHS) and local authority services. Patients (n=15) who were current conventional or electronic multicompartment medication device users or had medication adherence problems were recruited from community pharmacies. 3 informal carers participated. RESULTS: Electronic multicompartment medication devices which prompt the patient to take medication may be beneficial for selected individuals, particularly those with cognitive impairment, but who are not seriously impaired, provided they have a good level of dexterity. They may also assist individuals where it is important that medication is taken at fixed time intervals. These are likely to be people who are being supported to live alone. No single device suited everybody; smaller/lighter devices were preferred but their usefulness was limited by the small number/size of storage compartments. Removing medications was often challenging. Transportability was an important factor for patients and carers. A carer's alert if medication is not taken was problematic with multiple barriers to implementation and no consensus as to who should receive the alert. There was a lack of enthusiasm among professionals, particularly among pharmacists, due to concerns about responsibility and funding for devices as well as ensuring devices met regulatory standards for storage and labelling. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides indicators of which patients might benefit from an electronic multicompartment medication device as well as the kinds of features to consider when matching a patient with a device. It also highlights other considerations for successful implementation including issues of responsibility, regulation and funding. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-10-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5073531/ /pubmed/27798025 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012915 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Qualitative Research
Hall, Jill
Bond, Christine
Kinnear, Moira
McKinstry, Brian
Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
title Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
title_full Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
title_fullStr Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
title_short Views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
title_sort views of patients and professionals about electronic multicompartment medication devices: a qualitative study
topic Qualitative Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5073531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27798025
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012915
work_keys_str_mv AT halljill viewsofpatientsandprofessionalsaboutelectronicmulticompartmentmedicationdevicesaqualitativestudy
AT bondchristine viewsofpatientsandprofessionalsaboutelectronicmulticompartmentmedicationdevicesaqualitativestudy
AT kinnearmoira viewsofpatientsandprofessionalsaboutelectronicmulticompartmentmedicationdevicesaqualitativestudy
AT mckinstrybrian viewsofpatientsandprofessionalsaboutelectronicmulticompartmentmedicationdevicesaqualitativestudy