An embedded longitudinal multi-faceted qualitative evaluation of a complex cluster randomized controlled trial aiming to reduce clinically important errors in medicines management in general practice

Trials. 2012 Jun 8;13:78. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-78.

Abstract

Background: There is a need to shed light on the pathways through which complex interventions mediate their effects in order to enable critical reflection on their transferability. We sought to explore and understand key stakeholder accounts of the acceptability, likely impact and strategies for optimizing and rolling-out a successful pharmacist-led information technology-enabled (PINCER) intervention, which substantially reduced the risk of clinically important errors in medicines management in primary care.

Methods: Data were collected at two geographical locations in central England through a combination of one-to-one longitudinal semi-structured telephone interviews (one at the beginning of the trial and another when the trial was well underway), relevant documents, and focus group discussions following delivery of the PINCER intervention. Participants included PINCER pharmacists, general practice staff, researchers involved in the running of the trial, and primary care trust staff. PINCER pharmacists were interviewed at three different time-points during the delivery of the PINCER intervention. Analysis was thematic with diffusion of innovation theory providing a theoretical framework.

Results: We conducted 52 semi-structured telephone interviews and six focus group discussions with 30 additional participants. In addition, documentary data were collected from six pharmacist diaries, along with notes from four meetings of the PINCER pharmacists and feedback meetings from 34 practices. Key findings that helped to explain the success of the PINCER intervention included the perceived importance of focusing on prescribing errors to all stakeholders, and the credibility and appropriateness of a pharmacist-led intervention to address these shortcomings. Central to this was the face-to-face contact and relationship building between pharmacists and a range of practice staff, and pharmacists' explicitly designated role as a change agent. However, important concerns were identified about the likely sustainability of this new model of delivering care, in the absence of an appropriate support network for pharmacists and career development pathways.

Conclusions: This embedded qualitative inquiry has helped to understand the complex organizational and social environment in which the trial was undertaken and the PINCER intervention was delivered. The longitudinal element has given insight into the dynamic changes and developments over time. Medication errors and ways to address these are high on stakeholders' agendas. Our results further indicate that pharmacists were, because of their professional standing and skill-set, able to engage with the complex general practice environment and able to identify and manage many clinically important errors in medicines management. The transferability of the PINCER intervention approach, both in relation to other prescribing errors and to other practices, is likely to be high.

Publication types

  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Cluster Analysis
  • England
  • Feedback, Psychological
  • General Practice / organization & administration
  • General Practice / standards*
  • General Practice / statistics & numerical data
  • General Practitioners / organization & administration
  • General Practitioners / standards*
  • General Practitioners / statistics & numerical data
  • Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
  • Humans
  • Interviews as Topic
  • Longitudinal Studies
  • Medication Errors / prevention & control*
  • Medication Errors / statistics & numerical data*
  • Outcome Assessment, Health Care
  • Pharmacists / organization & administration
  • Pharmacists / standards*
  • Pharmacists / statistics & numerical data
  • Primary Health Care / organization & administration
  • Primary Health Care / standards
  • Primary Health Care / statistics & numerical data
  • Qualitative Research
  • Research Design / statistics & numerical data
  • Risk Management / methods