Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas
| Ano de defesa: | 2016 |
|---|---|
| Autor(a) principal: | |
| Orientador(a): | |
| Banca de defesa: | |
| Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
| Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: | por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de Sergipe
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde
|
| Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: | |
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: | |
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: | |
| Link de acesso: | https://ri.ufs.br/handle/riufs/3792 |
Resumo: | Objective: To describe the studies on the working process during the practice of pharmacist dispensing. Methods: Three systematic reviews the following steps were performed accordingly: (1) identification of studies in the following databases: PubMed / Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Lilacs, using the descriptors ''counseling'', ''dispensing'', ''community pharmacy services'',' ''pharmacies'' and ''pharmacists'' and its synonyms with different combinations; (2) evaluation studies, in which the title and summary were eligible, according to the following inclusion criteria: studies were conducted in community pharmacies, studies on the working process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing and articles published in English, Portuguese or Spanish. (3) Full Text evaluation according to the following inclusion criteria: - 1st Systematic Review: The aim of this review was to understand the process of work and the quality indicators used in the Dispensation. Thus, we had the following inclusion criteria: studies with quality indicators in the dispensing work process; - 2nd Systematic Review: this review aimed to identify the questions and instructions given by the pharmacist and propose a model of practice for dispensing. Therefore, he presented as specific inclusion criteria: studies that have questions and/ or guidelines in the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing; - 3rd Systematic Review: whose objective was to evaluate the studies documenting the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing. Therefore, we had the specific inclusion criteria: studies that addressed the documentation of the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing. When there were differences between the two evaluators, a third evaluator examined and judged discrepancies in each systematic review. The databases were reviewed until September 02, 2015. Results: - In the first systematic review included 60 articles. The studies showed high heterogeneity indicating the lack of standardization of the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing work process. It was found that the quality of the tools used to evaluate the dispensing work process was not often assessed. Nine quality indicators in practice dispensing work process were found. - In the second systematic review articles 65 were included, with most studies used the method of Simulated patient, with most patients showing a passive behavior. by were listed and quantified the most common questions and instructions given pharmacists as: identification and clinical condition of the patient, indication, dose and effect of the drug, allergy, duration of treatment, adverse effects, drug interactions, non-pharmacological treatments and referral to the doctor. - In the third systematic review were included 26 articles. Few studies have addressed the documentation as part of the dispensing work process and most documented by non-computerized instruments. Conclusion: Studies on pharmaceutical dispensing should be standardized, which will facilitate the comparison of results and measure the working process of this service. Protocols, algorithms and practical documentation are needed to guide, standardize the work process of dispensing and measuring the impact of interventions by community pharmacists in patient care. |
| id |
UFS-2_2dd118e4cd57e265bf53ce717b7f4537 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:oai:ri.ufs.br:repo_01:riufs/3792 |
| network_acronym_str |
UFS-2 |
| network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFS |
| repository_id_str |
|
| spelling |
Boaventura, Thays CarneiroLyra Júnior, Divaldo Pereira dehttp://lattes.cnpq.br/35054472670140592017-09-26T12:17:27Z2017-09-26T12:17:27Z2016-03-29BOAVENTURA, Thays Carneiro. Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas. 2016. 177 f. Dissertação (Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde) - Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Aracaju, 2016.https://ri.ufs.br/handle/riufs/3792Objective: To describe the studies on the working process during the practice of pharmacist dispensing. Methods: Three systematic reviews the following steps were performed accordingly: (1) identification of studies in the following databases: PubMed / Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Lilacs, using the descriptors ''counseling'', ''dispensing'', ''community pharmacy services'',' ''pharmacies'' and ''pharmacists'' and its synonyms with different combinations; (2) evaluation studies, in which the title and summary were eligible, according to the following inclusion criteria: studies were conducted in community pharmacies, studies on the working process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing and articles published in English, Portuguese or Spanish. (3) Full Text evaluation according to the following inclusion criteria: - 1st Systematic Review: The aim of this review was to understand the process of work and the quality indicators used in the Dispensation. Thus, we had the following inclusion criteria: studies with quality indicators in the dispensing work process; - 2nd Systematic Review: this review aimed to identify the questions and instructions given by the pharmacist and propose a model of practice for dispensing. Therefore, he presented as specific inclusion criteria: studies that have questions and/ or guidelines in the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing; - 3rd Systematic Review: whose objective was to evaluate the studies documenting the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing. Therefore, we had the specific inclusion criteria: studies that addressed the documentation of the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing. When there were differences between the two evaluators, a third evaluator examined and judged discrepancies in each systematic review. The databases were reviewed until September 02, 2015. Results: - In the first systematic review included 60 articles. The studies showed high heterogeneity indicating the lack of standardization of the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing work process. It was found that the quality of the tools used to evaluate the dispensing work process was not often assessed. Nine quality indicators in practice dispensing work process were found. - In the second systematic review articles 65 were included, with most studies used the method of Simulated patient, with most patients showing a passive behavior. by were listed and quantified the most common questions and instructions given pharmacists as: identification and clinical condition of the patient, indication, dose and effect of the drug, allergy, duration of treatment, adverse effects, drug interactions, non-pharmacological treatments and referral to the doctor. - In the third systematic review were included 26 articles. Few studies have addressed the documentation as part of the dispensing work process and most documented by non-computerized instruments. Conclusion: Studies on pharmaceutical dispensing should be standardized, which will facilitate the comparison of results and measure the working process of this service. Protocols, algorithms and practical documentation are needed to guide, standardize the work process of dispensing and measuring the impact of interventions by community pharmacists in patient care.Objetivo: descrever os estudos publicados sobre o processo de trabalho durante a prática da dispensação farmacêutica. Métodos: Três revisões sistemáticas foram realizadas de acordo as seguintes etapas: (1) identificação de estudos nas seguintes bases de dados: PubMed/ Medline, Web of Science, Scopus e Lilacs, usando os descritores ‘‘counseling”, ‘‘dispensing”, ‘‘community pharmacy services’’, ‘‘pharmacies’’ and ‘‘pharmacists’’ e seus sinônimos com diferentes combinações; (2) avaliação de estudos, no qual o título e resumo foram elegíveis, de acordo com as seguintes critérios de inclusão: estudos serem conduzidos em farmácias comunitárias, estudos sobre o processo de trabalho na prática da dispensação farmacêutica e artigos publicados em inglês, português ou espanhol. (3) avaliação do texto completo de acordo com os critérios de inclusão a seguir: - 1ª Revisão Sistemática: o objetivo desta revisão foi conhecer o processo de trabalho e os indicadores de qualidade utilizados na Dispensação. Assim, teve-se como critérios de inclusão: estudos com indicadores de qualidade no processo de trabalho da Dispensação; - 2ª Revisão Sistemática: esta revisão visou Identificar as perguntas e orientações realizadas pelo farmacêutico e propor um modelo de prática para a dispensação. Logo, apresentou-se como critérios de inclusão específicos: estudos que tiveram perguntas e/ou orientações no processo de trabalho na prática da dispensação farmacêutica; - 3ª Revisão Sistemática: cujo objetivo foi avaliar os estudos que documentaram o processo de trabalho na prática da dispensação farmacêutica. Portanto, teve-se como critério de inclusão específico: estudos que abordaram a documentação no processo de trabalho na prática da dispensação farmacêutica. Quando ocorreram divergências entre os dois avaliadores, um terceiro avaliador analisou e julgou as discrepâncias em cada revisão sistemática. As bases de dados foram revisadas até 02 de setembro de 2015. Resultados: - Na primeira revisão sistemática foram incluídos 60 artigos. Os estudos apresentaram alta heterogeneidade indicando a falta de padronização do processo de trabalho da prática da dispensação farmacêutica. Foi detectado que a qualidade dos instrumentos utilizados para avaliar o processo de trabalho da dispensação não foi, muitas vezes, avaliada. Nove indicadores de qualidade no processo de trabalho da dispensação prática foram encontrados. – Na segunda revisão sistemática foram incluídos 65 artigos, sendo que a maior parte dos estudos utilizou o método do Paciente Simulado, com a maioria dos pacientes apresentando comportamento passivo. Foram listadas e quantificadas as perguntas e orientações mais comuns realizadas pelos farmacêuticos como: identificação e condição clínica do paciente, indicação, dose e ação do medicamento, alergia, duração do tratamento, efeitos adversos, interações medicamentosas, tratamentos não farmacológicos e encaminhamento ao médico. – Na terceira revisão sistemática foram incluídos 26 artigos. Poucos estudos abordaram a documentação como parte do processo de trabalho da dispensação e a maioria documentou por meio de instrumentos não informatizados. Conclusão: Estudos e a prática da dispensação farmacêutica devem ser padronizados, o que irá facilitar a comparação dos resultados e medir o processo de trabalho desse serviço. Protocolos, algoritmos e documentação da prática são necessários para guiar, padronizar o processo de trabalho da dispensação e medir o impacto das intervenções dos farmacêuticos comunitários no cuidado ao paciente.Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPESapplication/pdfporUniversidade Federal de SergipePós-Graduação em Ciências da SaúdeUFSBrasilCiências da saúdeDispensaçãoFarmacêuticoFarmácia comunitáriaOrientaçãoDispensingPharmacistCommunity pharmacyCounselingCIENCIAS DA SAUDEProcesso de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticasWorking process of pharmaceutical dispensing : systematic reviewsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFSinstname:Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS)instacron:UFSTEXTTHAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.txtTHAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain346530https://ri.ufs.br/jspui/bitstream/riufs/3792/2/THAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.txt4cc5815c6e4ef81447a082634713d95dMD52THUMBNAILTHAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.jpgTHAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg1309https://ri.ufs.br/jspui/bitstream/riufs/3792/3/THAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.jpg696351b7a1df26e74a0018ba01f72f8cMD53ORIGINALTHAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdfapplication/pdf4739313https://ri.ufs.br/jspui/bitstream/riufs/3792/1/THAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdfa3a618cdf875efeee7657607b6b7d2e2MD51riufs/37922017-11-28 16:59:49.577oai:oai:ri.ufs.br:repo_01:riufs/3792Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://ri.ufs.br/oai/requestrepositorio@academico.ufs.bropendoar:2017-11-28T19:59:49Repositório Institucional da UFS - Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS)false |
| dc.title.por.fl_str_mv |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| dc.title.alternative.por.fl_str_mv |
Working process of pharmaceutical dispensing : systematic reviews |
| title |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| spellingShingle |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas Boaventura, Thays Carneiro Ciências da saúde Dispensação Farmacêutico Farmácia comunitária Orientação Dispensing Pharmacist Community pharmacy Counseling CIENCIAS DA SAUDE |
| title_short |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| title_full |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| title_fullStr |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| title_sort |
Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas |
| author |
Boaventura, Thays Carneiro |
| author_facet |
Boaventura, Thays Carneiro |
| author_role |
author |
| dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Boaventura, Thays Carneiro |
| dc.contributor.advisor1.fl_str_mv |
Lyra Júnior, Divaldo Pereira de |
| dc.contributor.authorLattes.fl_str_mv |
http://lattes.cnpq.br/3505447267014059 |
| contributor_str_mv |
Lyra Júnior, Divaldo Pereira de |
| dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Ciências da saúde Dispensação Farmacêutico Farmácia comunitária Orientação |
| topic |
Ciências da saúde Dispensação Farmacêutico Farmácia comunitária Orientação Dispensing Pharmacist Community pharmacy Counseling CIENCIAS DA SAUDE |
| dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv |
Dispensing Pharmacist Community pharmacy Counseling |
| dc.subject.cnpq.fl_str_mv |
CIENCIAS DA SAUDE |
| description |
Objective: To describe the studies on the working process during the practice of pharmacist dispensing. Methods: Three systematic reviews the following steps were performed accordingly: (1) identification of studies in the following databases: PubMed / Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Lilacs, using the descriptors ''counseling'', ''dispensing'', ''community pharmacy services'',' ''pharmacies'' and ''pharmacists'' and its synonyms with different combinations; (2) evaluation studies, in which the title and summary were eligible, according to the following inclusion criteria: studies were conducted in community pharmacies, studies on the working process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing and articles published in English, Portuguese or Spanish. (3) Full Text evaluation according to the following inclusion criteria: - 1st Systematic Review: The aim of this review was to understand the process of work and the quality indicators used in the Dispensation. Thus, we had the following inclusion criteria: studies with quality indicators in the dispensing work process; - 2nd Systematic Review: this review aimed to identify the questions and instructions given by the pharmacist and propose a model of practice for dispensing. Therefore, he presented as specific inclusion criteria: studies that have questions and/ or guidelines in the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing; - 3rd Systematic Review: whose objective was to evaluate the studies documenting the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing. Therefore, we had the specific inclusion criteria: studies that addressed the documentation of the work process in the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing. When there were differences between the two evaluators, a third evaluator examined and judged discrepancies in each systematic review. The databases were reviewed until September 02, 2015. Results: - In the first systematic review included 60 articles. The studies showed high heterogeneity indicating the lack of standardization of the practice of pharmaceutical dispensing work process. It was found that the quality of the tools used to evaluate the dispensing work process was not often assessed. Nine quality indicators in practice dispensing work process were found. - In the second systematic review articles 65 were included, with most studies used the method of Simulated patient, with most patients showing a passive behavior. by were listed and quantified the most common questions and instructions given pharmacists as: identification and clinical condition of the patient, indication, dose and effect of the drug, allergy, duration of treatment, adverse effects, drug interactions, non-pharmacological treatments and referral to the doctor. - In the third systematic review were included 26 articles. Few studies have addressed the documentation as part of the dispensing work process and most documented by non-computerized instruments. Conclusion: Studies on pharmaceutical dispensing should be standardized, which will facilitate the comparison of results and measure the working process of this service. Protocols, algorithms and practical documentation are needed to guide, standardize the work process of dispensing and measuring the impact of interventions by community pharmacists in patient care. |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2016-03-29 |
| dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2017-09-26T12:17:27Z |
| dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2017-09-26T12:17:27Z |
| dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| format |
masterThesis |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv |
BOAVENTURA, Thays Carneiro. Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas. 2016. 177 f. Dissertação (Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde) - Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Aracaju, 2016. |
| dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://ri.ufs.br/handle/riufs/3792 |
| identifier_str_mv |
BOAVENTURA, Thays Carneiro. Processo de trabalho da dispensação farmacêutica : revisões sistemáticas. 2016. 177 f. Dissertação (Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde) - Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Aracaju, 2016. |
| url |
https://ri.ufs.br/handle/riufs/3792 |
| dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
| language |
por |
| dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Sergipe |
| dc.publisher.program.fl_str_mv |
Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde |
| dc.publisher.initials.fl_str_mv |
UFS |
| dc.publisher.country.fl_str_mv |
Brasil |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Sergipe |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFS instname:Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS) instacron:UFS |
| instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS) |
| instacron_str |
UFS |
| institution |
UFS |
| reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFS |
| collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFS |
| bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://ri.ufs.br/jspui/bitstream/riufs/3792/2/THAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.txt https://ri.ufs.br/jspui/bitstream/riufs/3792/3/THAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf.jpg https://ri.ufs.br/jspui/bitstream/riufs/3792/1/THAYS_CARNEIRO_BOAVENTURA.pdf |
| bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
4cc5815c6e4ef81447a082634713d95d 696351b7a1df26e74a0018ba01f72f8c a3a618cdf875efeee7657607b6b7d2e2 |
| bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFS - Universidade Federal de Sergipe (UFS) |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositorio@academico.ufs.br |
| _version_ |
1851759385803489280 |