Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of a drug-related patient-reported outcome measure on drug-related problem identification, physicians’ acceptance, and clinical and quality of life outcomes: a randomized controlled trial

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Data are scarce regarding the usefulness of a pharmaceutical therapy-related quality of life measure including the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measure of Pharmaceutical Therapy for Quality of Life (PROMPT-QoL), for providing pharmaceutical care. Aim: To evaluate the impact of the PROMPT-QoL on identifying drug-related problems (DRPs), physicians’ acceptance of pharmacist’s recommendations on the DRP resolution, and clinical and quality of life outcomes. Method: A single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted at a tertiary public hospital in Thailand from October 2019 to May 2020. A total of 286 outpatients with chronic diseases were randomly allocated into the control group (provided with pharmaceutical care only) (N = 146) and the intervention group (provided with pharmaceutical care together with use of the PROMPT-QoL) (N = 140). Results: A significantly higher mean number of DRPs could be identified in the intervention group than in the control group (p < 0.001). Moreover, there was a significantly higher proportion of physicians’ acceptance of pharmacist’s recommendations on the DRP resolution in the intervention than in the control group (p = 0.019). Regarding the clinical outcome, a significantly higher proportion of the DRP resolution was found in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.002). For quality of life outcomes, the intervention group yielded a significantly higher mean difference between posttest and pretest on the Medicine and Disease Information domain score of the PROMPT-QoL (p = 0.029) and the EuroQoL-Visual Analog Scale score (p = 0.031) than the control group. Conclusion: This study revealed that the application of the PROMPT-QoL together with pharmaceutical care favorably influenced identification of DRPs, physicians’ acceptances, and clinical outcomes.

Trial registration TCTR20201208005 on December 5, 2020.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cipolle RJ, Strand LM, Morley PC. Pharmaceutical care practice: the patient-centered approach to medication management services. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Watanabe JH, McInnis T, Hirsch JD. Cost of prescription drug–related morbidity and mortality. Ann Pharmacother. 2018;52:829–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tarapan S. Incidence, causes and management of cost of drug-related problems in hospitalized patients at Loengnoktha Crown Prince Hospital [master thesis]. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Minimum daily wage rate. Ministry of Labor of Thailand. https://www.mol.go.th/ Accessed 14 Sep 2021

  5. Sakthong P, Suksanga P, Sakulbumrungsil R, Winit-Watjana W. Development of patient-reported outcomes measure of pharmaceutical therapy for quality of life (PROMPT-QoL): a novel instrument for medication management. Res Soc Admin Pharm. 2015;11:315–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sakthong P, Chinthammit C, Sukarnjanaset P, Sonsa-Ardjit N, Munpan W. Psychometric properties of the patient-reported outcomes measure of pharmaceutical therapy for quality of life (PROMPT-QoL). Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;12C:41–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sakthong P, Sangthonganotai T. A randomized controlled trial of the impact of pharmacist-led patient-centered pharmaceutical care on patients’ medicine therapy-related quality of life. Res Soc Admin Pharm. 2018;14:332–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Greenhalgh J, Long AF, Flynn R. The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: lack of impact or lack of theory? Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:833–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Detmar SB, Muller MJ, Schornagel JH, Wever LDV, Aaronson NK . Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient-physician communication: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2002;288:3027–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Santana M-J, Feeny D, Johnson JA, McAlister FA, Kim D, Weinkauf J, et al. Assessing the use of health-related quality of life measures in the routine clinical care of lung-transplant patients. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:371–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Taenzer P, Bultz BD, Carlson LE, Speca M, DeGagne T, Olson K, et al. Impact of computerized quality of life screening on physician behaviour and patient satisfaction in lung cancer outpatients. Psychooncology. 2000;9:203–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Boyer L, Lancon C, Baumstarck K, Parola N, Berbis J, Auquier P. Evaluating the impact of a quality of life assessment with feedback to clinicians in patients with schizophrenia: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2013;202:447–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Velikova G, Booth L, Smith AB, Brown PM, Lynch P, Brown JM, et al. Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:714–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, Scher HI, Hudis CA, Sabbatini P, et al. Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:557–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jaisue P, Sakthong P. Effect of the use of the PROMPT-QoL on pharmacist-patient communication and patient satisfaction. Thai J Pharm Pract. 2021;13:785–802.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41:1149–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M, Ramos-Goñi JM, Tongsiri S, Ingsrisawang L, Teerawattananon Y. The EQ-5D-5L valuation study in Thailand. Exp Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018;18:551–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kaufmann CP, Tremp R, Kurt EH, Lampert ML. Inappropriate prescribing: a systematic overview of published assessment tools. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;70:1–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Beers MH, Ouslander JG, Rollingher I, Reuben DB, Brooks J, Beck JC. Explicit criteria for determining inappropriate medication use in nursing home residents. Arch Intern Med. 1991;151:1825–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gallagher P, Ryan C, Byrne S, O'Mahony D. STOPP (screening tool of older person’s prescriptions) and START (screening tool to alert doctors to right treatment). Consensus validation. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;46:72–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Barry PJ, Gallagher P, Ryan C, O'mahony D. START (screening tool to alert doctors to the right treatment)–an evidence-based screening tool to detect prescribing omissions in elderly patients. Age Ageing. 2007;36:632–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Aaronson N, Elliott T, Greenhalgh J, Halyard M, Hess R, Miller D, et al. User’s guide to implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice. International Society for Quality of Life Research. file:///D:/Old%20ones/Philosophy%20of%20PharCare/2015UsersGuide_PRO_Version2.pdf. Accessed 17 Sep 2021

  24. Sakthong P, Sonsa-Ardjit N, Sukarnjanaset P, Munpan W. Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L in Thai patients with chronic diseases. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:3015–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the patients for their participations and the hospital staff for their help in data collection. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Phyathai Road, Pathumwan, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand

    Phantipa Sakthong

  2. Pharmacy Unit, Suratthani Hospital, Suratthani, Thailand

    Piyaporn Jaisue

Authors
  1. Phantipa Sakthong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Piyaporn Jaisue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phantipa Sakthong.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sakthong, P., Jaisue, P. Impact of a drug-related patient-reported outcome measure on drug-related problem identification, physicians’ acceptance, and clinical and quality of life outcomes: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Clin Pharm 44, 320–329 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-021-01341-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-021-01341-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation