The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 275 No 7379 p712
10 December 2005

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

  Acrobat Reader

News summary

Patients question pharmacists' skills for MURs

Some patients would prefer a doctor or a nurse to carry out a medicines review rather than a pharmacist, according to a report published this week by the patient concordance group Medicines Partnership.

They doubted whether a pharmacist had the skills to change their medication and also whether a pharmacist would liaise with their GP afterwards about the results of the review.

Researchers found that “many” patients believed that the reviews were being carried out to save money or, when they were conducted by a pharmacist, to save GP time — especially when they took only a few minutes.

The 29 patients questioned, however, had mixed views about the benefits of a medicines review. Although they approved of the idea in principle, they failed to perceive that it brought any real benefit.

Some patients said reviews were a “waste of time” while others thought they were “brilliant”, the report “Evaluation of room for review: a guide to medication review” revealed.

Commenting on the findings, Joanne Shaw, director of Medicines Partnership, said: “Patients tell us that medication reviews are a good idea and many have had positive experiences. But to make a real impact for patients and the NHS we need to encourage health professionals to review medicines face to face with those patients who would benefit most and create a partnership so that people can ask questions and make better informed choices about medicine-taking.”

The report recommends that health professionals who carry out reviews should write to patients ahead of any review explaining why it is being done and reassuring them it has nothing to do with cost-cutting. They should also have more training in patient communication and consultation skills and should make sure patients have an action plan to spell out the outcome of the review.