↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of a guided continuous quality improvement program in community pharmacies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of a guided continuous quality improvement program in community pharmacies
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40545-017-0114-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chanadda Chinthammit, Michael T. Rupp, Edward P. Armstrong, Tara Modisett, Rebecca P. Snead, Terri L. Warholak

Abstract

The importance of creating and sustaining a strong culture of patient safety has been recognized as a critical component of safe medication use. This study aims to assess changes in attitudes toward patient safety culture and frequency of quality-related event (QRE) reporting after guided implementation of a continuous quality improvement (CQI) program in a panel of community pharmacies in the United States (U.S.). Twenty-one community pharmacies volunteered to participate in the project and were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. Pharmacy staff in the intervention group received guided training to ensure full implementation of a CQI program while those in the control group partially implemented the program. Pharmacy staff in both groups completed retrospective pre-post safety culture questionnaires and reported medication errors and near misses that occurred in their practices. Rasch analysis was applied to assess questionnaire validity and reliability and to confirm if the ordinal level data approximated interval level measures. Paired t-tests and repeated measure analysis of covariance tests were subsequently used to compare observed changes in the attitudes of subjects and frequency of QREs reporting in intervention and control groups. Sixty-nine employees completed the questionnaire, a 43.9% response rate. Improvement in attitudes toward patient safety was statistically significant in the intervention group in six domains: staff, training, and skill (p = 0.017); patient counseling (p = 0.043); communication about mistakes (p < 0.001); response to mistakes (p < 0.001); organizational learning - continuous improvement (p < 0.001); and overall patient safety perceptions (p = 0.033). No significant differences were observed in QRE reporting rates between intervention and control groups. However, differences were observed in the types of QREs reported (e.g., incorrect safety cap) and the point in the prescription processing workflow where a QRE was detected (e.g., partner check station, and drug utilization review station) in the intervention group (p < 0.001). Guided CQI program implementation increased the self-reported patient safety culture attitudes among staff.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Librarian 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Other 9 23%
Unknown 17 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 20 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#14,954,297
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#286
of 413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,053
of 315,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.