Advertisement

International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 282–286 | Cite as

Prescribing with indication: uptake of regulations in current practice and patients opinions in the Netherlands

  • Inge G. A. Holsappel
  • Ellen S. KosterEmail author
  • Nina A. Winters
  • Marcel L. Bouvy
Short Research Report

Abstract

Background Since January 2012 the Dutch Medicines Act has been changed to enable medication monitoring and counselling for individual patients. Prescribers of medicines are now obliged to record the indication on the prescription of medicines mentioned in this law. Objective To assess patients’ opinion about recording of the indication on prescription and to explore the uptake of alterations in the medicines act in clinical practice. Methods The study was conducted in a sample of 57 community pharmacies belonging to the Utrecht Pharmacy Practice Network for Education and Research. In total, 528 patients were interviewed in these pharmacies and automated dispensing records were obtained from 22 community pharmacies to check prescriptions for linking of diagnosis codes (indications). Results For 12.5 % of the prescriptions that required notification of the indication, a diagnosis code was mentioned. For all other medicines, 15.1 % of the prescriptions were provided with diagnosis codes. There was large variation between different drugs. Only 11.7 % of the interviewed patients were familiar with the law. The majority of patients (91.1 %) had no objections with mentioning the indication for use on the prescription. Conclusion Indications are insufficiently mentioned on prescriptions while the majority of patients are generally positive about the law.

Keywords

Community pharmacy Medicines act Medication safety Prescribing indication Prescription The Netherlands 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the community pharmacies for participating in this study, the pharmacy students are acknowledged for their contribution to the data collection.

Funding

No special funding was received for this study.

Conflicts of interest

No conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    Leendertse AJ, Egberts AC, Stoker LJ, van den Bemt PM. HARM Study Group. Frequency of and risk factors for preventable medication-related hospital admissions in the netherlands. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(17):1890–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Las Mercedes Martinez Sanchez A. Medication errors in a spanish community pharmacy: nature, frequency and potential causes. Int J Clin Pharm. 2013;35(2):185–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moore TJ, Walsh CS, Cohen MR. Reported medication errors associated with methotrexate. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2004;61(13):1380–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Minister van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport, E.I. Schippers. Regeling Geneesmiddelenwet, Bijlage 1 [Dutch Medicines Act, Appendix 1]. http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0022160 Accessed 18 Sept 2013.
  5. 5.
    Folmer H, de Leest K, Grandia L, Njoo KH. Voorstel standaardlijst van geneesmiddel & reden van voorschrijven. [Proposal standard list medicines & indication for prescription]. 2008. http://www.nictiz.nl/page/Publicaties?mod[360][i]=158&mod[360][search_type]=title&mod[360][search_for]=oorstel%20standaardlijst. Accessed 18 Sept 2013.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hofmans-Okkes IM, Lamberts H. The international classification of primary care (ICPC): new applications in research and computer-based patient records in family practice. Fam Pract. 1996;13(3):294–302.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Okkes I, Jamoulle M, Lamberts H, Bentzen N. ICPC-2-E: the electronic version of ICPC-2. differences from the printed version and the consequences. Fam Pract. 2000;17(2):101–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    SFK. Data en feiten (2012) Het jaar 2011 in cijfers. [Facts and Figures 2012: 2011 in numbers]. Stichting Farmaceutische Kengetallen. August 2012. Available through: http://www.sfk.nl/pdf-documenten/data-en-feiten/data-en-feiten-2012 Accessed 18 Sept 2013.
  9. 9.
    Al-Arifi MN. Patients’ perception, views and satisfaction with pharmacists’ role as health care provider in community pharmacy setting at riyadh, saudi arabia. Saudi Pharm J. 2012;20(4):323–30.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McAuley JW, Miller MA, Klatte E, Shneker BF. Patients with epilepsy’s perception on community pharmacist’s current and potential role in their care. Epilepsy Behav. 2009;14(1):141–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lewis RQ, Fletcher M. Implementing a national strategy for patient safety: lessons from the national health service in england. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14(2):135–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaplan HC, Brady PW, Dritz MC, et al. The influence of context on quality improvement success in health care: a systematic review of the literature. Milbank Q. 2010;88(4):500–59.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    de Jong J, Visser MR, Wieringa-de Waard M. Which barriers affect morbidity registration performance of GP trainees and trainers? Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(8):708–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Koninklijke Nederlandse Maatschappij ter bevordering der Pharmacie 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Inge G. A. Holsappel
    • 1
  • Ellen S. Koster
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nina A. Winters
    • 1
  • Marcel L. Bouvy
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Pharmaceutical SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations