Intended for healthcare professionals

Primary Care

Randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist of elderly patients receiving repeat prescriptions in general practice

BMJ 2001; 323 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7325.1340 (Published 08 December 2001) Cite this as: BMJ 2001;323:1340
  1. Arnold G Zermansky, honorary senior research fellow (arnoldz{at}easynet.co.uk)a,
  2. Duncan R Petty, research pharmacista,
  3. David K Raynor, professor of pharmacy practice, medicines, and their usersa,
  4. Nick Freemantle, professor of clinical epidemiology and biostatisticsb,
  5. Andy Vail, lecturerc,
  6. Catherine J Lowe, lecturera
  1. a Division of Academic Pharmacy Practice, School of Healthcare Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9UT
  2. b Department of Primary Care and General Practice, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT
  3. c Biostatistics Group, University of Manchester, Hope Hospital, Salford, Manchester M6 8HD
  1. Correspondence to: A G Zermansky
  • Accepted 12 October 2001

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether a pharmacist can effectively review repeat prescriptions through consultations with elderly patients in general practice.

Design: Randomised controlled trial of clinical medication review by a pharmacist against normal general practice review.

Setting: Four general practices.

Participants: 1188 patients aged 65 or over who were receiving at least one repeat prescription and living in the community.

Intervention: Patients were invited to a consultation at which the pharmacist reviewed their medical conditions and current treatment.

Main outcome measures: Number of changes to repeat prescriptions over one year, drug costs, and use of healthcare services.

Results: 590 (97%) patients in the intervention group were reviewed compared with 233 (44%) in the control group. Patients seen by the pharmacist were more likely to have changes made to their repeat prescriptions (mean number of changes per patient 2.2 v 1.9; difference=0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.57; P=0.02). Monthly drug costs rose in both groups over the year, but the rise was less in the intervention group (mean difference £4.72 per 28 days, −£7.04 to -£2.41); equivalent to £61 per patient a year. Intervention patients had a smaller rise in the number of drugs prescribed (0.2 v 0.4; mean difference −0.2, −0.4 to −0.1). There was no evidence that review of treatment by the pharmacist affected practice consultation rates, outpatient consultations, hospital admissions, or death rate.

Conclusions: A clinical pharmacist can conduct effective consultations with elderly patients in general practice to review their drugs. Such review results in significant changes in patients' drugs and saves more than the cost of the intervention without affecting the workload of general practitioners.

What is already known on this topic

What is already known on this topic Review of patients on long term drug treatment is important but is done inadequately

Evidence from the United States shows that pharmacists can improve patient care by reviewing drug treatment

What this study adds

What this study adds Consultations with a clinical pharmacist are an effective method of reviewing the drug treatment of older patients

Review by a pharmacist results in more drug changes and lower prescribing costs than normal care plus a much higher review rate

Use of healthcare services by patients is not increased

Footnotes

  • Funding NHS Research and Development National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Accepted 12 October 2001
View Full Text