Introduction
Although there have been a number of published studies involving pharmacist-run medication review services, very few have specifically looked at patient satisfaction. One study, with a 59% response rate, found that 93.5% of patients would recommend others to attend a similar review.¹ Another stated that all patients questioned thought the medication review service should be run permanently but was based on the views of only 20 patients.² Neither of these studies compared patient satisfaction between different patient groups.

Aims

1. To determine patient satisfaction with pharmacist-run medication review clinics.
2. To compare patient satisfaction between two groups of patients selected using different criteria.
3. To determine whether demographic factors affect patient satisfaction.

Method
A pharmacist ran two medication review clinics using different methods of patient identification. Repeat prescription of five or more items was used to identify patients in clinic 1 and in prescriptions for diuretics other than frusemide or bendrofluazide 2.5mg were used for clinic 2. Patients unable to attend the surgery were visited at home. All patients reviewed were sent a patient satisfaction questionnaire. Non-responders were sent a second copy after 4 weeks.

Results
96 patients were identified in clinic 1 and 49 in clinic 2, giving a total of 145 patients. 116 (80%) patients responded to the questionnaire. The mean (SD) age of the respondents was 71.9 (10.3) years. 76 (65.5%) were female. 18 (15.8%) of the patients responding were seen at home.

The mean (SD) number of prescription items received regularly was 7.9 (3.3) in clinic 1 and 4.7 (2.5) in clinic 2; this difference was statistically significant (independent samples t-test).

The mean appointment length was 26 minutes. 110/112 (98%) respondents felt the length of the appointment was satisfactory.

104/105 (99%) respondents said that all their questions were answered satisfactorily during the appointment and 78/94 (83%) said it increased their knowledge of their medication. 95/99 (96%) patients would recommend others to attend a similar appointment and 95/104 (91%) would attend again themselves. 94/98 (96%) patients agreed that the service should be continued. There were no significant differences seen between the two groups of patients in the answers to these satisfaction questions (Mann-Whitney test). Similarly, age, sex and number of prescription items were not associated with patient satisfaction (Pearson correlation).

34 respondents had changes made to their regime following medication review. 16/34 (47%) had one change, 15 (44%) had two and 3 (9%) patients had three changes made. The number of changes made was not associated with patient satisfaction (Pearson correlation).

Discussion & conclusions
The majority of patients were satisfied with the pharmacist-run medication review service and there was no difference in the level of patient satisfaction using the two methods of patient identification.

Patients who had changes made to their medication regime were equally satisfied as those who had no changes.

Number of prescription items, age and sex did not affect patient satisfaction with the service in this study.

References

1. Nathan A, Goodyer LI, Lovejoy A, Anderson C. Patients' and pharmacists' opinions of "brown-bag" medication reviews: a qualitative study. Pharmacutical Journal 1998;261(supplement):R60.
2. Burtonwood AM, Hinchliffe AL, Tinkler GG. A prescription for quality: a role for the clinical pharmacist in general practice. Pharmaceutical Journal 1998;261:678-80.