Daniel Sabater-Hernández

Bio: Daniel Sabater-Hernández is an academic researcher from University of Granada. The author has contributed to research in topics: Pharmacy & Health care. The author has an hindex of 18, co-authored 61 publications receiving 1229 citations. Previous affiliations of Daniel Sabater-Hernández include University of Technology, Sydney.

A systematic review of implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare and resulting generic implementation framework

Abstract: Implementation science and knowledge translation have developed across multiple disciplines with the common aim of bringing innovations to practice. Numerous implementation frameworks, models, and theories have been developed to target a diverse array of innovations. As such, it is plausible that not all frameworks include the full range of concepts now thought to be involved in implementation. Users face the decision of selecting a single or combining multiple implementation frameworks. To aid this decision, the aim of this review was to assess the comprehensiveness of existing frameworks. A systematic search was undertaken in PubMed to identify implementation frameworks of innovations in healthcare published from 2004 to May 2013. Additionally, titles and abstracts from Implementation Science journal and references from identified papers were reviewed. The orientation, type, and presence of stages and domains, along with the degree of inclusion and depth of analysis of factors, strategies, and evaluations of implementation of included frameworks were analysed. Frameworks were assessed individually and grouped according to their targeted innovation. Frameworks for particular innovations had similar settings, end-users, and ‘type’ (descriptive, prescriptive, explanatory, or predictive). On the whole, frameworks were descriptive and explanatory more often than prescriptive and predictive. A small number of the reviewed frameworks covered an implementation concept(s) in detail, however, overall, there was limited degree and depth of analysis of implementation concepts. The core implementation concepts across the frameworks were collated to form a Generic Implementation Framework, which includes the process of implementation (often portrayed as a series of stages and/or steps), the innovation to be implemented, the context in which the implementation is to occur (divided into a range of domains), and influencing factors, strategies, and evaluations. The selection of implementation framework(s) should be based not solely on the healthcare innovation to be implemented, but include other aspects of the framework’s orientation, e.g., the setting and end-user, as well as the degree of inclusion and depth of analysis of the implementation concepts. The resulting generic structure provides researchers, policy-makers, health administrators, and practitioners a base that can be used as guidance for their implementation efforts.

Defining professional pharmacy services in community pharmacy

Abstract: Multiple terms and definitions exist to describe specific aspects of pharmacy practice and service provision, yet none encompass the full range of professional services delivered by community pharmacy. The majority of current pharmacy service definitions and nomenclature refer to either the professional philosophy of pharmaceutical care or to specific professional pharmacy services; particularly pharmaceutical services provided by pharmacists with a focus on drug safety, effectiveness and health outcomes. The objective of this paper is therefore to define a professional pharmacy service within the context of the community pharmacy model of service provision. A professional pharmacy service is defined as "an action or set of actions undertaken in or organised by a pharmacy, delivered by a pharmacist or other health practitioner, who applies their specialised health knowledge personally or via an intermediary, with a patient/client, population or other health professional, to optimise the process of care, with the aim to improve health outcomes and the value of healthcare." Based on Donabedian's framework, the professional pharmacy service definition incorporates the concepts of organizational structure, process indicators and outcome measures. The definition will assist in many areas including recognition of the full range of services provided by community pharmacy and facilitating the identification of indicators of professional pharmacy service implementation and sustainable provision. A simple conceptual model for incorporating all services provided by community pharmacy is proposed.

Cost-Utility Analysis of a Medication Review with Follow-Up Service for Older Adults with Polypharmacy in Community Pharmacies in Spain: The conSIGUE Program

Abstract: The concept of pharmaceutical care is operationalized through pharmaceutical professional services, which are patient-oriented to optimize their pharmacotherapy and to improve clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of a medication review with follow-up (MRF) service for older adults with polypharmacy in Spanish community pharmacies against the alternative of having their medication dispensed normally. The study was designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial, and was carried out over a time horizon of 6 months. The target population was older adults with polypharmacy, defined as individuals taking five or more medicines per day. The study was conducted in 178 community pharmacies in Spain. Cost-utility analysis adopted a health service perspective. Costs were in euros at 2014 prices and the effectiveness of the intervention was estimated as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). In order to analyze the uncertainty of ICER results, we performed a non-parametric bootstrapping with 5000 replications. A total of 1403 older adults, aged between 65 and 94 years, were enrolled in the study: 688 in the intervention group (IG) and 715 in the control group (CG). By the end of the follow-up, both groups had reduced the mean number of prescribed medications they took, although this reduction was greater in the IG (0.28 ± 1.25 drugs; p < 0.001) than in the CG (0.07 ± 0.95 drugs; p = 0.063). Older adults in the IG saw their quality of life improved by 0.0528 ± 0.20 (p < 0.001). In contrast, the CG experienced a slight reduction in their quality of life: 0.0022 ± 0.24 (p = 0.815). The mean total cost was €977.57 ± 1455.88 for the IG and €1173.44 ± 3671.65 for the CG. In order to estimate the ICER, we used the costs adjusted for baseline medications and QALYs adjusted for baseline utility score, resulting in a mean incremental total cost of −€250.51 ± 148.61 (95 % CI −541.79 to 40.76) and a mean incremental QALY of 0.0156 ± 0.004 (95 % CI 0.008–0.023). Regarding the results from the cost-utility analysis, the MRF service emerged as the dominant strategy. The MRF service is an effective intervention for optimizing prescribed medication and improving quality of life in older adults with polypharmacy in community pharmacies. The results from the cost-utility analysis suggest that the MRF service is cost effective.

Qualitative study on the implementation of professional pharmacy services in Australian community pharmacies using framework analysis

Abstract: Multiple studies have explored the implementation process and influences, however it appears there is no study investigating these influences across the stages of implementation. Community pharmacy is attempting to implement professional services (pharmaceutical care and other health services). The use of implementation theory may assist the achievement of widespread provision, support and integration. The objective was to investigate professional service implementation in community pharmacy to contextualise and advance the concepts of a generic implementation framework previously published. Purposeful sampling was used to investigate implementation across a range of levels of implementation in community pharmacies in Australia. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed using a framework methodology. Data was charted using implementation stages as overarching themes and each stage was thematically analysed, to investigate the implementation process, the influences and their relationships. Secondary analyses were performed of the factors (barriers and facilitators) using an adapted version of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), and implementation strategies and interventions, using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) discrete implementation strategy compilation. Six stages emerged, labelled as development or discovery, exploration, preparation, testing, operation and sustainability. Within the stages, a range of implementation activities/steps and five overarching influences (pharmacys' direction and impetus, internal communication, staffing, community fit and support) were identified. The stages and activities were not applied strictly in a linear fashion. There was a trend towards the greater the number of activities considered, the greater the apparent integration into the pharmacy organization. Implementation factors varied over the implementation stages, and additional factors were added to the CFIR list and definitions modified/contextualised for pharmacy. Implementation strategies employed by pharmacies varied widely. Evaluations were lacking. The process of implementation and five overarching influences of professional services implementation in community pharmacy have been outlined. Framework analysis revealed, outside of the five overarching influences, factors influencing implementation varied across the implementation stages. It is proposed at each stage, for each domain, the factors, strategies and evaluations should be considered. The Framework for the Implementation of Services in Pharmacy incorporates the contextualisation of implementation science for pharmacy.

What is polypharmacy? A systematic review of definitions

Abstract: Multimorbidity and the associated use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy), is common in the older population. Despite this, there is no consensus definition for polypharmacy. A systematic review was conducted to identify and summarise polypharmacy definitions in existing literature. The reporting of this systematic review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE and Cochrane were systematically searched, as well as grey literature, to identify articles which defined the term polypharmacy (without any limits on the types of definitions) and were in English, published between 1st January 2000 and 30th May 2016. Definitions were categorised as i. numerical only (using the number of medications to define polypharmacy), ii. numerical with an associated duration of therapy or healthcare setting (such as during hospital stay) or iii. Descriptive (using a brief description to define polypharmacy). A total of 1156 articles were identified and 110 articles met the inclusion criteria. Articles not only defined polypharmacy but associated terms such as minor and major polypharmacy. As a result, a total of 138 definitions of polypharmacy and associated terms were obtained. There were 111 numerical only definitions (80.4% of all definitions), 15 numerical definitions which incorporated a duration of therapy or healthcare setting (10.9%) and 12 descriptive definitions (8.7%). The most commonly reported definition of polypharmacy was the numerical definition of five or more medications daily (n = 51, 46.4% of articles), with definitions ranging from two or more to 11 or more medicines. Only 6.4% of articles classified the distinction between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy, using descriptive definitions to make this distinction. Polypharmacy definitions were variable. Numerical definitions of polypharmacy did not account for specific comorbidities present and make it difficult to assess safety and appropriateness of therapy in the clinical setting.

Measurement of Blood Pressure in Humans: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Abstract: The accurate measurement of blood pressure (BP) is essential for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. This article provides an updated American Heart Association scientific statement on BP measurement in humans. In the office setting, many oscillometric devices have been validated that allow accurate BP measurement while reducing human errors associated with the auscultatory approach. Fully automated oscillometric devices capable of taking multiple readings even without an observer being present may provide a more accurate measurement of BP than auscultation. Studies have shown substantial differences in BP when measured outside versus in the office setting. Ambulatory BP monitoring is considered the reference standard for out-of-office BP assessment, with home BP monitoring being an alternative when ambulatory BP monitoring is not available or tolerated. Compared with their counterparts with sustained normotension (ie, nonhypertensive BP levels in and outside the office setting), it is unclear whether adults with white-coat hypertension (ie, hypertensive BP levels in the office but not outside the office) have increased cardiovascular disease risk, whereas those with masked hypertension (ie, hypertensive BP levels outside the office but not in the office) are at substantially increased risk. In addition, high nighttime BP on ambulatory BP monitoring is associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Both oscillometric and auscultatory methods are considered acceptable for measuring BP in children and adolescents. Regardless of the method used to measure BP, initial and ongoing training of technicians and healthcare providers and the use of validated and calibrated devices are critical for obtaining accurate BP measurements.

Interventions to improve the appropriate use of polypharmacy for older people

Abstract: Background Inappropriate polypharmacy is a particular concern in older people and is associated with negative health outcomes. Choosing the best interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy is a priority, hence interest in appropriate polypharmacy, where many medicines may be used to achieve better clinical outcomes for patients, is growing. Objectives This review sought to determine which interventions, alone or in combination, are effective in improving the appropriate use of polypharmacy and reducing medication-related problems in older people. Search methods In November 2013, for this first update, a range of literature databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched, and handsearching of reference lists was performed. Search terms included 'polypharmacy', 'medication appropriateness' and 'inappropriate prescribing'. Selection criteria A range of study designs were eligible. Eligible studies described interventions affecting prescribing aimed at improving appropriate polypharmacy in people 65 years of age and older in which a validated measure of appropriateness was used (e.g. Beers criteria, Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI)). Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Study-specific estimates were pooled, and a random-effects model was used to yield summary estimates of effect and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to assess the overall quality of evidence for each pooled outcome. Main results Two studies were added to this review to bring the total number of included studies to 12. One intervention consisted of computerised decision support; 11 complex, multi-faceted pharmaceutical approaches to interventions were provided in a variety of settings. Interventions were delivered by healthcare professionals, such as prescribers and pharmacists. Appropriateness of prescribing was measured using validated tools, including the MAI score post intervention (eight studies), Beers criteria (four studies), STOPP criteria (two studies) and START criteria (one study). Interventions included in this review resulted in a reduction in inappropriate medication usage. Based on the GRADE approach, the overall quality of evidence for all pooled outcomes ranged from very low to low. A greater reduction in MAI scores between baseline and follow-up was seen in the intervention group when compared with the control group (four studies; mean difference -6.78, 95% CI -12.34 to -1.22). Postintervention pooled data showed a lower summated MAI score (five studies; mean difference -3.88, 95% CI -5.40 to -2.35) and fewer Beers drugs per participant (two studies; mean difference -0.1, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.09) in the intervention group compared with the control group. Evidence of the effects of interventions on hospital admissions (five studies) and of medication-related problems (six studies) was conflicting. Authors' conclusions It is unclear whether interventions to improve appropriate polypharmacy, such as pharmaceutical care, resulted in clinically significant improvement; however, they appear beneficial in terms of reducing inappropriate prescribing.

The prevalence of severe refractory asthma

Abstract: Background Severe asthma is characterized by difficulty to achieve disease control despite high-intensity treatment. However, prevalence figures of severe asthma are lacking, whereas longstanding estimates vary between 5% and 10% of all asthmatic patients. Knowing the exact prevalence of severe refractory asthma as opposed to difficult-to-control asthma is important for clinical decision making, drug development, and reimbursement policies by health authorities. Objective We sought to estimate the prevalence of severe refractory asthma as defined by the Innovative Medicine Initiative consensus. Methods Adult patients with a prescription for high-intensity treatment (high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting β2-agonists or medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids combined with oral corticosteroids and long-acting β2-agonists) were extracted from 65 Dutch pharmacy databases, representing 3% of the population (500,500 inhabitants). Questionnaires were sent to 5,002 patients, of which 2,312 were analyzed. The diagnosis of asthma and degree of asthma control were derived from questionnaires to identify patients with difficult-to-control asthma. Inhalation technique was assessed in a random sample of 60 adherent patients (prescription filling, ≥80%). Patients with difficult-to-control asthma, adherence to treatment, and a correct inhalation technique were qualified as having severe refractory asthma. Results were mirrored to the Dutch population. Results Of asthmatic adults, 3.6% (95% CI, 3.0% to 4.1%) qualified for a diagnosis of severe refractory asthma, representing 10.4 patients per 10,000 inhabitants. Conclusion The prevalence of severe refractory asthma might be lower than estimated by expert opinion. This implies that currently recognized severe asthma subphenotypes could meet the criteria of rare diseases.