| Title |
Quality indicators for pharmaceutical care: a comprehensive set with national scores for Dutch community pharmacies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-016-0301-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martina Teichert, Tim Schoenmakers, Nico Kylstra, Berend Mosk, Marcel L. Bouvy, Frans van de Vaart, Peter A. G. M. De Smet, Michel Wensing |
| Abstract |
Background The quality of pharmaceutical care in community pharmacies in the Netherlands has been assessed annually since 2008. The initial set has been further developed with pharmacists and patient organizations, the healthcare inspectorate, the government and health insurance companies. The set over 2012 was the first set of quality indicators for community pharmacies which was validated and supported by all major stakeholders. The aims of this study were to describe the validated set of quality indicators for community pharmacies and to report their scores over 2012. In subanalyses the score development over 5 years was described for those indicators, that have been surveyed before and remained unchanged. Methods Community pharmacists in the Netherlands were invited in 2013 to provide information for the set of 2012. Quality indicators were mapped by categories relevant for pharmaceutical care and defined for structures, processes and dispensing outcomes. Scores for categorically-measured quality indicators were presented as the percentage of pharmacies reporting the presence of a quality aspect. For numerical quality indicators, the mean of all reported scores was expressed. In subanalyses for those indicators that had been questioned previously, scores were collected from earlier measurements for pharmacies providing their scores in 2012. Multilevel analysis was used to assess the consistency of scores within one pharmacy over time by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Results For the set in 2012, 1739 Dutch community pharmacies (88 % of the total) provided information for 66 quality indicators in 10 categories. Indicator scores on the presence of quality structures showed relatively high quality levels. Scores for processes and dispensing outcomes were lower. Subanalyses showed that overall indicators scores improved within pharmacies, but this development differed between pharmacies. Conclusions A set of validated quality indicators provided insight into the quality of pharmaceutical care in the Netherlands. The quality of pharmaceutical care improved over time. As of 2012 quality structures were present in at least 80 % of the community pharmacies. Variation in scores on care processes and outcomes between individual pharmacies and over time can initiate future research to better understand and facilitate quality improvement in community pharmacies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 22 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 32 | 42% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 1% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2020.
All research outputs
#4,795,018
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#257
of 1,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,921
of 301,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#5
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.