Home' Australian Pharmacist : Australian Pharmacist December 2014 Contents Australian Pharmacist December 2014 I © Pharmaceutical Society of Australia Ltd.
with the 5CPA MedsCheck Service
Guidelines requirements on registration,
consultation area setting, time spent
per consultation, pharmacist’s duties
and patient recruitment criteria.
However, it is unclear if this consistency
with the guideline requirements can
be associated with quality service
in terms of how it affects patient’s
outcome. There is currently no evidence
that Australia’s MC or DMC services
improve adherence, health outcomes or
represent a cost effective intervention,
factors which need to be addressed.
Areas for further research should also
focus on quality measures for DMC,
which could assess the appropriateness
of DMC for patients.
This six month Implementation
Program successfully achieved
initial implementation of DMC in all
participating pharmacies. There was an
increase in the number of DMCs delivered
in each pharmacy; however consistency
and sustainability has not been achieved
thus far. In the literature, sustainability
is also known as maintenance or
15 Challenges remained
with firstly, maintaining individual
behaviour change and secondly, the
extent to which a new practice (such as
a DMC service) becomes routine and
part the everyday culture or norms of
the pharmacy. It has been suggested
that the time intervals of assessing
implementation is 6–12 months, whilst
two or more years are required to achieve
16 Considering the time,
money and effort that were invested by
participating pharmacies, as well as the
diabetes clinical resources developed and
provided by RDA in the implementation
of DMC, a 6-month period is clearly not
sufficient to see a return for investment.
It is therefore important to consider a
longer Implementation Program with the
aim to achieve sustainability.
Overall this pilot project showed
the current Implementation Program
in collaboration with a diagnostic
company could be effective in initiating
implementation of DMC. The extended
role of RDA Territory Managers as
facilitators for implementation was
largely accepted by community
pharmacists. This program could be
improved in specific areas to enhance
and support service implementation,
particularly the length of the program
to achieve sustainability, as well as
modification of the external facilitation
process to better suit each pharmacy’s
Appendix A: participant inclusion
and exclusion criteria
a) Section 90 Pharmacy.
b) Maintain the following insurance
while participant is an MMR service
provider and for three years after the
• Public liability insurance in the
amount of $10 million
• Workers’ compensation insurance as
required by law and
• Professional indemnity insurance in
the amount of $10 million.
c) Pharmacy already undertaking
Pharmacy Practice Incentive
d) Registered as approved MedsCheck
service provider or agree to register
by 12 June 2013
e) Consultation area is available in the
a) Pharmacy management staff (owner
or manager) does not agree to
support implementing DMC service.
Appendix B: Criteria for fidelity
• Pharmacist and support staff to be
involved in the DMC process
• Pharmacist and support staff to utilise
• Pharmacy is registered as Medication
Management Review Programs
• Pharmacists are registered as service
• Consultation area is in a screened area
or separate room that is distinct from
the general public area of a pharmacy
• Pharmacist conducting Diabetes
MedsCheck is not responsible for
other professional duties during
Diabetes MedsCheck consultation
• Pharmacist provided Medicine List,
Action Plan and/or RDA 360 view 3
day profile to patient
• Average Diabetes MedsCheck
1. 5CPA. Fifth Community Pharmacy Agreement: Medication
Management – MedsCheck and Diabetes MedsCheck
2013 [cited 2013 8 March]; At: http://www.5cpa.com.au/
2. DOH. Medication Management Review Data. 2013 4
Dec 2013 [cited 2014 31 Mar]; At: http://www.health.gov.
3. AHS, Australian Health Survey. 2012, Australian Bureau of
4. Brittain KL, Kuhn CH. Use of community pharmacy-
provided diabetes services to aid physicians in the
National Committee for Quality Assurance recognition
program. Journal of the American Pharmacists
Association: JAPhA, 2009;49(2):209–11 .
5. Canada O. MedsCheck: Information for Health Care
Professionals. 2013 [cited 2014 28 Mar]; At: http://www.
6. DHBSS, New Zealand National Pharmacist Services
Framework, D.H . Board, Editor. 2007: New Zealand.
7. MMR . Medication Management Review Data. 2014 [cited
2014 1 Feb]; At: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/
8. Bradley F, et al. Determinants of the uptake of medicines
use reviews (MURs) by community pharmacies in England:
A multi-method study. Health Policy, 2008;88(2–3):258–68 .
9. Meyers DC, et al. Practical Implementation Science:
Developing and Piloting the Quality Implementation
Tool. American Journal of Community Psychology,
10. RE -AIM. Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation
Maintenance (RE-AIM). 2012 [cited 2013, 29 Mar].
11. Damschroder L, et al. Fostering implementation of health
services research findings into practice: a consolidated
framework for advancing implementation science.
Implementation Science, 2009;4(1):50.
12. Latif A, Boardman H. Community pharmacists’ attitudes
towards medicines use reviews and factors affecting
the numbers performed. Pharmacy World & Science,
13. Sheridan J, et al. Patients’ and pharmacists’ perceptions
of a pilot Medicines Use Review service in Auckland,
New Zealand. Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Services
14. PharmacyNews, Pharmacists furious with CWH
MedsCheck push. 2014.
15. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the Public
Health Impact of Health Promotion Interventions: The
RE-AIM Framework. American Journal of Public Health,
16. Glasgow R, et al. The RE-AIM framework for evaluating
interventions: what can it tell us about approaches
to chronic illness management? Patient Educ Couns,
Links Archive Australian Pharmacist November 2014 Australian Pharmacist January 2015 Navigation Previous Page Next Page