ars.els-cdn.com€¦ · Web view23. (Organisation and management).mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol

eAppendix 1. Full electronic search strategy for Medline OvidSP, 25th June 2015

1. independent* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]2. supplementary prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]3. nurs* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]4. pharmac* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]5. podiatr* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]6. chiropad* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]7. radiograph* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]8. optometr* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]9. physiotherap* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]10. physio* prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]11. autonomous prescrib*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]12. prescription/13. non-medical prescrib*.mp.14. 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 or 11 or 12 or 1315. Facilitator*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]16. Success*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]17. Value*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]18. Advantag*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease

supplementary concept word, unique identifier]19. Patient satisfaction.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]20. Patient experience.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]21. Implementation.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]22. patient satisfaction/23. (Organisation and management).mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]24. 15 or 16 or 17 or 18 or 19 or 20 or 21 or 22 or 2325. 14 and 2426. Barrier*.mp.27. Safety issue*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]28. Education*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]29. Obstacle*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]30. Failure*.mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol supplementary concept word, rare disease supplementary concept word, unique identifier]31. education/32. medication error/33. drug safety/34. patient safety/35. 26 or 27 or 28 or 29 or 30 or 31 or 32 or 33 or 3436. 14 and 3537. 25 or 3638. limit 37 to (human and English language and yr="1994 - 2015")39. 14 and 1540. 14 and 2641. 39 or 4042. limit 41 to (human and English language and yr="1994 -Current")

Table 2 Included qualitative studies and characteristics.

Study Design Country NMP profession Healthcare setting

Healthcare specialty

Participants

Avery et al, 200732

Surveys and Interviews

UK (England)

Nurses, Pharmacists

Community care,Hospital care

Range of Specialties

Total n = 110Surveys n = 85: Nurses n = 80, Midwives n = 3, Pharmacists n = 2,Interviewed n = 25: Nurses n = 16, Doctors n = 5, Pharmacist n = 1, Managers n = 3,

Bennett and Jones, 200845

Surveys and Focus Groups

UK Nurses Community care

HIV Total n = 8Surveys: Nurses n = 8Focus Groups: Nurses n = 8

Bradley and Nolan, 200751

Interviews UK Nurses Community care,Hospital care


Total n = 45Nurses n = 45, Face-to-face interview n = 31, Telephone interview n = 14

Bradley et al, 200836

Focus Groups UK Nurses Community care,Hospital care

Mental Health

Total n = 15Nurses n = 15

Carey et al, 200937

Interviews UK Nurses Hospital care Paediatrics Total n = 21Nurses n = 7, Doctors n = 11, Managers n = 3

Carey et al, 201038

Interviews UK (England)

Nurses Community care

Dermatology

Total n = 40Nurses (prescribers) n = 11, Doctors n = 12, Admin Staff n = 11, Nurses (Non-prescribers) n = 6

Courtenay and Carey, 200939


Nurses Hospital care Paediatrics Total n = 14Nurse prescribers n = 7, Doctors (consultant level) n = 4, Managers n = 3

Courtenay et al, 201133


Community-practitioner

Community care,


Total n = 28NMP leads n = 28

prescribers, Pharmacists,Nurses, Physiotherapists, Podiatrists, Optometrists

Hospital care

Cousins and Donnell, 201262



General Practice


Downer and Shepherd, 201055

Interviews UK (Scotland)


District nursing

Total n = 8District nurses n = 8

Earle et al, 201157



Mental Health

Total n = 8Nurse prescribers n = 2, Service users n = 6

Glod and Manchester, 200048

Surveys USA Nurses Community careHospital care

Mental Health

Total n = 1352Advance practice nurses n = 1352

Guirguis et al, 201474

Interviews Canada Pharmacists Community care


Total n = 38Pharmacist prescribers n = 13, Non-prescribing pharmacists n = 25

Hales, 200256 Surveys USA Nurses Community careHospital care

Mental Health

Total n = 32Advanced Practice Nurses n = 32

Hall et al, 200375 Interviews UK (England)



Total n = 21Community Nurses n = 21

Hall et al, 200640 Interviews and Surveys

UK (England)



Total n = 67Interviewed n = 23: District nurses n = 11, Health visitors n = 10, Practice nurses n = 2Surveys: NMP Leads n = 44

Hill et al, 201476 Interviews UK (Scotland)

Pharmacists Community care

Addiction Services

Total n = 97Service users n = 86, Pharmacist prescribers n = 5, Doctors n = 6

Hobson et al, Interviews UK Pharmacists, Community Range of Total n = 18

201049 (England) Nurses careHospital care

Specialties Service users n = 18

Jones et al, 201150

Interviews, non-participant observation and surveys

UK (England)

Nurses Hospital care Range of Specialties

Total: n = 196Interviewed n = 18: prescribers (profession not stated) n = 3, mentors/colleagues n = 7, Managers n = 8Structured non-participant observation of nurse prescribers n = 2, Doctors n = 2, consultations n = 52Surveys: Service users n = 122

Kelly et al, 201054

Surveys UK (England)


General Practice

Total n = 151Community Practice nurses n = 151

Lewis-Evans and Jester, 200458





Luker et al, 199777




Total n = 256Service users n = 256; pre prescribing n = 157, post prescribing n = 148 (33.3% interviewed post were also interviewed pre-prescribing).

Maclure et al, 201341

Survey UK (Scotland)

Community-practitioner prescribers, Pharmacists,Nurses, Physiotherapists, Podiatrists, Optometrists

Community careHospital care


Total n = 1855Service users n = 1855

Makowsky et al, 201359

Interviews Canada Pharmacists Community care


Total n = 38Pharmacists n = 38

McCann et al, Surveys UK (NI) Pharmacists Community Range of Total n = 105

201142 careHospital care

Specialties Pharmacists n = 105

McCann et al, 201243

Interviews UK (NI) Pharmacists Community careHospital care


Total n = 35Pharmacists n = 11, Doctors n = 11, Other Stakeholders n = 13

Mulholland, 201465

Surveys UK Pharmacists Hospital care Paediatrics Total n = 45Pharmacists n = 45

Nolan et al, 200453

Surveys UK Nurses Community careHospital care

Mental Health


Page et al, 200864


Nurses Hospital care Dementia Total n = 20Service users n = 13, Staff (non-prescribers) n = 7

Ross and Kettles, 201234

Surveys and focus groups

UK (Scotland)

Nurses Community careHospital care

Mental Health

Total n = 45Nurses n = 33, Focus group, Nurses n = 12

Ryan-Woolley et al 200829

Survey UK Nurses Community careHospital care

Oncology and Palliative care


Ryan-Woolley et al 200728

Survey UK Nurses Community careHospital care

Oncology and Palliative care


Scrafton et al, 201235


Nurses Hospital care Range of Specialties


Shannon and Spence, 201178

Focus groups and Interviews

UK (Scotland)


Cardiology

Total n = 21Focus Groups: Doctors n = 21Interviews: Doctors n = 21,

Stenner et al, 200961



Dermatology

Total n = 18Doctors n = 12, Nurses (non-prescribers) n = 6

Stenner et al, 201046



Diabetes Total n = 31Nurse prescribers n = 10, Doctors n

Hospital care = 9, Admin staff n = 9, Nurses (non-prescribers) n = 3

Stenner and Courtenay, 2008a30



Pain Management

Total n = 26Nurse prescribers n = 26

Stenner and Courtenay, 2008b31



Pain Management

Total n = 26Nurse prescribers n = 26

Stenner et al 201160



Diabetes Total n = 41Service Users n = 41

Travers, 200544 Focus groups and interviews

UK (England)



Total n = 7Focus Groups: Nurses n = 7Interviews: Nurses n = 7,

While and Biggs, 200452

Surveys UK (England)




Wix, 200779 Surveys UK (England)


Mental Health

Total n = 78Service users n = 78

Young, 200980 Interviews UK (Wales)




Table 4Quality assessment using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs tool, qualitative studies.

Ave

ry e

t al,

2007

Ben

nett

and

Jone

s, 20

08

Bra

dley

and

Nol

an, 2

007

Bra

dley

et a

l, 20

08

Car

ey e

t al,

2009

Car

ey e

t al,

2010

Cou

rtena

y an

d ca

rey,

200

9

Cou

rtena

y et

al,

2011

Cou

sins

and

Don

nell,

201

2

Dow

ner a

nd S

heph

erd,

201

0

Earle

et a

l, 20

11

Glo

d an

d M

anch

este

r, 20

00

Gui

rgui

s et a

l, 20

14

Hal

es, 2

002

Hal

l et a

l, 20

03

Hal

l et a

l, 20

06

Hill

et a

l, 20

14

Hob

son

et a

l, 20

10

Jone

s et a

l, 20

11

Kel

ly e

t al,

2010

Lew

is-E

vans

and

Jest

er,

2004

Luke

r et a

l, 19

97

Explicit theoretical framework 0 0 2 0 1 1 2 1 1 3 3 1 3 2 0 0 0 3 3 0 3 0Statement of aims/objectives in main body of report 2 3 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 1 1 2 0 2 3 3 3 0Clear description of research setting 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 3 2Evidence of sample size considered in terms of analysis 1 1 3 0 2 1 1 1 3 0 1 1 3 0 0 3 0 3 3 1 3 0Representative sample of target group of a reasonable

3 3 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 0 2 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 1 1

sizeDescription of procedure for data collection 1 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 2 1Rationale for choice of data collection tool(s) 2 3 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0Detailed recruitment data 3 3 1 1 2 1 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 0 0 2 2 3 3 2 1 1Statistical assessment of reliability and validity of measurement tool(s) (quantitative only)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A 1

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A 1

N/A

N/A

N/A

Fit between stated research question and method of data collection (quantitative)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A 3

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A 1

N/A

N/A

N/A

Fit between stated research question and format and content of data collection tool eg,

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

interview schedule (qualitative)Fit between research question and method of analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 3 1 3 0 0Good justification for analytical method selected 0 1 2 0 1 3 1 0 0 3 2 0 3 0 0 3 0 3 3 0 3 0Assessment of reliability of analytical process (qualitative only) 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 2 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 1 2 3 0 3 0Evidence of user involvement in design 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 0Strengths and limitations critically discussed 3 0 3 0 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 0 1 3 2 3 3 0 3 0Total 18 19 19 9 20 19 30 25 24 20 26 27 32 9 9 27 14 31 35 17 28 5

Continued

Mac

lure

et a

l, 20

13

Mak

owsk

y et

al,

2013

McC

ann

et a

l, 20

11

McC

ann

et a

l, 20

12

Mul

holla

nd, 2

014

Nol

an e

t al,

2004

Page

et a

l, 20

08

Ros

s and

Ket

tles,

Rya

n-W

oolle

y et

al

2008

Rya

n-W

oolle

y et

al

Scra

fton

et a

l, 20

12

Shan

non

and

Spen

ce,

2011

Sten

ner e

t al,

2009

Sten

ner e

t al,

2010

Sten

ner a

nd

Cou

rtena

y, 2

008a

Sten

ner a

nd

Cou

rtena

y, 2

008b

Sten

ner e

t al 2

011

Trav

ers,

2005

Whi

le a

nd B

iggs

,

Wix

, 200

7

You

ng, 2

009

Explicit theoretical framework 1 3 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 2 2 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 3Statement of aims/objectives in main body of report 3 3 3 2 2 1 0 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 2 1Clear description of research setting 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 2Evidence of sample size considered in terms of analysis 0 3 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 3 3 0 3 1 2 3 0 0 1 0 0Representative sample of target group of a reasonable size 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 1 2 3 2 2 1 3 1 1Description of procedure for data collection 1 3 2 3 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 1 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 2Rationale for choice of data collection tool(s) 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2Detailed recruitment data 0 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 2 3 2 3 1 2Statistical assessment of reliability and validity of measurement tool(s)

N/A

N/A

1 N/A

0 N/A

N/A

1 N/A

0 N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

0 0 N/A

(quantitative only)Fit between stated research question and method of data collection (quantitative)

N/A

N/A 0

N/A 0

N/A

N/A 0

N/A 0

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A 0 0

N/A

Fit between stated research question and format and content of data collection tool e.g. interview schedule (qualitative) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Fit between research question and method of analysis 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 2 3 3 0 3 3 3 2 0 0 0 0Good justification for analytical method selected 2 3 1 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1Assessment of reliability of analytical process (qualitative only) 0 3 0 3 0 2 3 3 2 0 1 2 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 1Evidence of user involvement in design 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1Strengths and limitations critically discussed 1 3 1 1 0 2 3 3 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 0 3 1 3Total 18 32 20 25 11 17 19 34 15 19 29 24 22 21 22 28 23 10 20 10 19

Table 7Included quantitative studies and characteristics.

Study Design Country NMP profession Healthcare setting

Healthcare specialty

Participants

Courtenay and Carey, 200866

Survey: Postal questionnaire 2006

UK Nurses Community care,Hospital care



Courtenay et al, 201271

Survey: Online questionnaire2010 to 2011

UK Community-practitioner prescribers, Pharmacists,Nurses, Physiotherapists, Podiatrists, Optometrists

Community care,Hospital care


Total n = 883Nurses n = 793, Managers n = 33, Pharmacists n = 36, Allied health and Optometrists n = 9, not disclosed n = 12

Farrell et al, 201167

Survey: Online or postal questionnaireCollection year NR


Oncology Total n = 103Nurses n = 103

Gumber et al, 201270

Survey: Postal questionnaire 2010

UK Nurses, Pharmacists Community care,Hospital care


Total n = 20Nurses n = 18, Pharmacists n = 2

Hutchison et al, 201263

Survey: Online questionnaire

Canada Pharmacists Hospital care Range of Specialties

Total n = 342Pharmacists n = 342

2010

Kaplan and Brown, 200468

Survey: Postal questionnaire2001

USA Nurses Community care,Hospital care



Larsen, 200469 Survey: Postal questionnaire


Emergency/Urgent care

Total n = 192Managers n = 192

Table 8Quality assessment using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs tool, quantitative studies.23

Domain Study reference number

Courtenay and Carey,

200866

Courtenay et al,

201271

Farrell et al, 201167

Gumber et al, 201270

Hutchison et al,

201263

Kaplan and Brown, 200464

Larsen, 200469

Explicit theoretical framework 1 0 0 0 0 0 0Statement of aims/objectives in main body of report 3 3 2 3 1 3 3Clear description of research setting 2 3 2 3 3 3 2Evidence of sample size considered in terms of analysis 3 1 2 1 1 1 0Representative sample of target group of a reasonable size 3 3 3 2 3 3 1Description of procedure for data collection 3 3 2 1 3 3 2Rationale for choice of data collection tool(s) 0 1 1 0 0 1 0Detailed recruitment data 3 3 3 1 3 3 2Statistical assessment of reliability and validity of measurement tool(s) (quantitative only) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Fit between stated research question and method of data collection (quantitative) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Fit between stated research question and format and content of data collection tool eg, interview schedule (qualitative) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AFit between research question and method of analysis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Good justification for analytical method selected 0 2 0 0 0 0 0Assessment of reliability of analytical N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

process (qualitative only)Evidence of user involvement in design 1 1 2 0 2 2 2Strengths and limitations critically discussed 2 2 0 3 3 1 2Total

21 22 17 14 19 20 14

Documents

ars.els-cdn.com€¦ · Web view23. (Organisation and management).mp. [mp=title, abstract, original title, name of substance word, subject heading word, keyword heading word, protocol