Patient Preferences for Pharmacy Services: A Systematic Review of Studies Based on Discrete Choice Experiments

Overview

Journal Patient

Specialty Health Services

Date 2023 Dec 13

PMID 38093090

Authors

Margaux Riboulet

Anne-Laure Clairet

Mohamed Bennani

Virginie Nerich

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background And Objective: In recent years, the mission of pharmacists has evolved and the model of the caregiver-patient relationship has been challenged by a new patient-centered approach. A challenge to providing personalized care is the assessment of patient preferences. We aimed to systematically identify published discrete choice experiments related to patient preferences for pharmacy services and to assess the quality of the selected articles.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted in two databases (PubMed and Embase, until March 2023) according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. The quality of the selected articles was assessed according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research conjoint analysis checklist.

Results: Among the 421 articles identified, 16 published studies were included and analyzed. They were mostly published in pharmaceutical (n = 6), economic (n = 4), and public health (n = 4) journals. Only two articles concerned the field of hospital pharmacy. Only five presented the specific pharmacy service studied: filling of prescriptions, management of symptoms, treatment delivery, and components of pharmacist counseling. Five articles focused on pharmacy services related to a specific disease. None fully fulfilled the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research checklist, only partially fulfilled.

Conclusions: According to the identified studies, cost, time, logistics (organizational criteria), and pharmacists' courtesy and skills were consistently cited as factors influencing patient preferences for pharmacy services. The disclosure of patient preferences is a complex and under-researched topic, especially in the field of pharmacy, but interest is growing. As the mission of pharmacists evolves to bring them closer to patients, the better understanding of patient preferences in pharmacy services will allow for better targeting and better integration of patient profiles in patient management.

Citing Articles

Construction and validation of an instrument to identify barriers to implementing pharmaceutical care.

da Silva L, Silva R, Pereira M, Herdeiro M, Baldoni A Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm. 2024; 16:100529.

PMID: 39512514 PMC: 11541423. DOI: 10.1016/j.rcsop.2024.100529.

References

Epstein R, Street Jr R . The values and value of patient-centered care. Ann Fam Med. 2011; 9(2):100-3. PMC: 3056855. DOI: 10.1370/afm.1239. View

van der Heide I, Snoeijs S, Quattrini S, Struckmann V, Hujala A, Schellevis F . Patient-centeredness of integrated care programs for people with multimorbidity. Results from the European ICARE4EU project. Health Policy. 2017; 122(1):36-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.10.005. View

Mossialos E, Courtin E, Naci H, Benrimoj S, Bouvy M, Farris K . From "retailers" to health care providers: Transforming the role of community pharmacists in chronic disease management. Health Policy. 2015; 119(5):628-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.02.007. View

Barnett K, Mercer S, Norbury M, Watt G, Wyke S, Guthrie B . Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2012; 380(9836):37-43. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60240-2. View

Coste J, Valderas J, Carcaillon-Bentata L . Estimating and characterizing the burden of multimorbidity in the community: A comprehensive multistep analysis of two large nationwide representative surveys in France. PLoS Med. 2021; 18(4):e1003584. PMC: 8109815. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003584. View

Hanlon J, Lindblad C, Gray S . Can clinical pharmacy services have a positive impact on drug-related problems and health outcomes in community-based older adults?. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2004; 2(1):3-13. DOI: 10.1016/s1543-5946(04)90002-5. View

de Gregori J, Pistre P, Boutet M, Porcher L, Devaux M, Pernot C . Clinical and economic impact of pharmacist interventions in an ambulatory hematology-oncology department. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020; 26(5):1172-1179. DOI: 10.1177/1078155220915763. View

Zerbit J, Kroemer M, Fuchs B, Detroit M, Decroocq J, Vignon M . Pharmaceutical cancer care for haematology patients on oral anticancer drugs: Findings from an economic, clinical and organisational analysis. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2022; 31(6):e13753. DOI: 10.1111/ecc.13753. View

Roustit M, Chaumais M, Chapuis C, Gairard-Dory A, Hadjadj C, Chanoine S . Evaluation of a collaborative care program for pulmonary hypertension patients: a multicenter randomized trial. Int J Clin Pharm. 2020; 42(4):1128-1138. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-020-01047-8. View

10.

Belaiche S, Romanet T, Bell R, Calop J, Allenet B, Zaoui P . Pharmaceutical care in chronic kidney disease: experience at Grenoble University Hospital from 2006 to 2010. J Nephrol. 2011; 25(4):558-65. DOI: 10.5301/jn.5000033. View

11.

Ramello M, Audisio R . The value of patient centred care in oncology. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020; 47(3 Pt A):492-494. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.06.010. View

12.

Sebai J, Yatim F . [Patient-Centered Care model and New Public Management : Confluence and paradox.]. Sante Publique. 2018; 30(4):517-526. DOI: 10.3917/spub.185.0517. View

13.

Lancsar E, Louviere J . Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008; 26(8):661-77. DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004. View

14.

Bridges J, Hauber A, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser L, Regier D . Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011; 14(4):403-13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013. View

15.

Hauber A, Gonzalez J, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, Prior T, Marshall D, Cunningham C . Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2016; 19(4):300-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004. View

16.

Naik-Panvelkar P, Armour C, Rose J, Saini B . Patient preferences for community pharmacy asthma services: a discrete choice experiment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012; 30(10):961-76. DOI: 10.2165/11594350-000000000-00000. View

17.

Naik-Panvelkar P, Armour C, Rose J, Saini B . Patients' value of asthma services in Australian pharmacies: the way ahead for asthma care. J Asthma. 2012; 49(3):310-6. DOI: 10.3109/02770903.2012.658130. View

18.

Feehan M, Walsh M, Godin J, Sundwall D, Munger M . Patient preferences for healthcare delivery through community pharmacy settings in the USA: A discrete choice study. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2017; 42(6):738-749. DOI: 10.1111/jcpt.12574. View

19.

Porteous T, Ryan M, Bond C, Hannaford P . Preferences for self-care or professional advice for minor illness: a discrete choice experiment. Br J Gen Pract. 2006; 56(533):911-7. PMC: 1934050. View

20.

Gerard K, Tinelli M, Latter S, Blenkinsopp A, Smith A . Valuing the extended role of prescribing pharmacist in general practice: results from a discrete choice experiment. Value Health. 2012; 15(5):699-707. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.006. View