↓ Skip to main content

Preparing pharmacists to deliver a targeted service in hypertension management: evaluation of an interprofessional training program

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, September 2015
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
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Preparing pharmacists to deliver a targeted service in hypertension management: evaluation of an interprofessional training program
Published in
BMC Medical Education, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0434-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Beata V. Bajorek, Kate S. Lemay, Parker J. Magin, Christopher Roberts, Ines Krass, Carol L. Armour

Abstract

Non-adherence to medicines by patients and suboptimal prescribing by clinicians underpin poor blood pressure (BP) control in hypertension. In this study, a training program was designed to enable community pharmacists to deliver a service in hypertension management targeting therapeutic adjustments and medication adherence. A comprehensive evaluation of the training program was undertaken. Tailored training comprising a self-directed pre-work manual, practical workshop (using real patients), and practice scenarios, was developed and delivered by an inter-professional team (pharmacists, GPs). Supported by practical and written assessment, the training focused on the principles of BP management, BP measurement skills, and adherence strategies. Pharmacists' experience of the training (expectations, content, format, relevance) was evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively. Immediate feedback was obtained via a questionnaire comprising Likert scales (1 = "very well" to 7 = "poor") and open-ended questions. Further in-depth qualitative evaluation was undertaken via semi-structured interviews several months post-training (and post service implementation). Seventeen pharmacists were recruited, trained and assessed as competent. All were highly satisfied with the training; other than the 'amount of information provided' (median score = 5, "just right"), all aspects of training attained the most positive score of '1'. Pharmacists most valued the integrated team-based approach, GP involvement, and inclusion of real patients, as well as the pre-reading manual, BP measurement workshop, and case studies (simulation). Post-implementation the interviews highlighted that comprehensive training increased pharmacists' confidence in providing the service, however, training of other pharmacy staff and patient recruitment strategies were highlighted as a need in future. Structured, multi-modal training involving simulated and inter-professional learning is effective in preparing selected community pharmacists for the implementation of new services in the context of hypertension management. This training could be further enhanced to prepare pharmacists for the challenges encountered in implementing and evaluating services in practice.

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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 106 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Professor 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 34 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Psychology 4 4%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 35 33%
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 13 October 2015.
All research outputs
#14,004,469
of 23,232,430 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,879
of 3,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,381
of 275,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#42
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,232,430 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 275,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.