This study explored how Structured Medication Reviews (SMRs) are being undertaken and the challenges to their successful implementation and sustainability.

A cross-sectional mixed methods online survey.

Primary care in England.

120 clinical pharmacists with experience in conducting SMRs in primary care.

Survey responses were received from clinical pharmacists working in 15 different regions. The majority were independent prescribers (62%, n=74), and most were employed by Primary Care Networks (65%, n=78), delivering SMRs for one or more general practices. 61% (n=73) had completed, or were currently enrolled in, the approved training pathway. Patient selection was largely driven by the primary care contract specification: care home residents, patients with polypharmacy, patients on medicines commonly associated with medication errors, patients with severe frailty and/or patients using potentially addictive pain management medication. Only 26% (n=36) of respondents reported providing patients with information in advance. The majority of SMRs were undertaken remotely by telephone and were 21–30 min in length. Much variation was reported in approaches to conducting SMRs, with SMRs in care homes being deemed the most challenging due to additional complexities involved. Challenges included not having sufficient time to prepare adequately, address complex polypharmacy and complete follow-up work generated by SMRs, issues relating to organisational support, competing national priorities and lack of ‘buy-in’ from some patients and General Practitioners.

These results offer insights into the role being played by the clinical pharmacy workforce in a new country-wide initiative to improve the quality and safety of care for patients taking multiple medicines. Better patient preparation and trust, alongside continuing professional development, more support and oversight for clinical pharmacists conducting SMRs, could lead to more efficient medication reviews. However, a formal evaluation of the potential of SMRs to optimise safe medicines use for patients in England is now warranted.

To provide insight into how people cope with living with atrial fibrillation (AF) and taking oral anticoagulants (OACs), informing how services and healthcare delivery could be improved to offer the appropriate support patients require, thereby optimising their quality of life and well-being.

A qualitative study employing focus group discussions (FGDs).

11 primary care units in a socioeconomically deprived area of the Butantan district in São Paulo, Brazil.

Adults (≥18 years) with AF purposively recruited based on sex, age and socioeconomic status.

Saturation was met with three FGDs comprising seven, five and five participants, respectively. Theme one focused on self-management, where many participants discussed their methods for adhering to dietary restrictions and alternative medications, including plant-based options and specific foods, and how they modified their daily activities to reduce AF complications and symptoms. Theme two was rationality, where participants described three main ways that they cope with taking long-term medication (often warfarin): thinking that it controls their AF symptoms; it is an obligation; it prevents morbidity and premature death. Theme three was attitude and emotions, where participants described their initial reactions of shock and fear after diagnosis and ongoing emotions of sadness and frustration due to required self-management activities and regular blood tests. Theme four was medication regimen, where participants discussed difficulties with polypharmacy, changes to AF medication (particularly from non-vitamin K antagonist OACs (NOACs) to warfarin), side effects from taking warfarin and various methods of medication management.

This study presents three key findings with implications for patient care and support. First, the shock and fear experienced during diagnosis due to a lack of knowledge about AF suggests that improvements in public knowledge about AF are needed. Second, people with additional chronic conditions may need improved care and support, given the concern participants had regarding when and how to take their medications safely. Third, improved access to NOACs may reduce the difficulties, frustrations and concerns participants had regarding warfarin use (eg, diet, dose adjustments, self-management and monthly international normalised ratio tests).