37

THE FUTURE OF PHARMACY

VOL 28, NO.1 - JUNE 2012

Fig. 7. Scores from EQ-5D

s t a t i s t i c a l l y sig n i fi c a nt dif f e r e n c e w a s fo u n d in t h e s c o r e s of ge n e r a l h e a l t h . T h e a v e r a g e s c o r e w a s 3 6 . 0 a n d in c r e a s e d t o 4 1 . 6 af t e r t h e int e r v e nt i o n s of t h e p h a r m a c i s t s ( p = 0 . 0 2 4 ) . Alt h o u g h n o sig n i fi c a nt dif f e r e n c e s we r e fo u n d , t h e s c o r e s fo r p hy s i c a l f un c t i o n i n g , v it a l i t y, s o c i a l f un c t i o n i n g , a n d ro l e lim i t a t i o n du e t o em ot i o n a l p r o b l e m s t r e n d e d up af t e r p h a r m a c i s t s ’ s e r v i c e s . We su s p e c t t h a t if we co u l d r e t r i e v e m o r e qu e s t i o n n a i r e s f r o m t h e p a t i e nt s , t h e dif f e r e n c e s m a y b e m o r e o b v i o u s .

T h e ot h e r qu e s t i o n n a i r e , EQ - 5D, is a n ot h e r s t a n d a r d i z e d in s t r u m e nt d e v e l o p e d by Euro Q o l Gr o u p t o m e a s u r e qu a l i t y of lif e . 1 1 It ha s t h e d e s c r i p t i v e s y s t e m a n d t h e v i s u a l a n a l o g s c a l e . T h e d e s c r i p t i v e s y s t e m is wh e r e t h e p a t i e nt e v a l u a t e s hi s / h e r ow n s t a t u s o n m o b i l i t y, s e lf - c a r e , us u a l a c t i v i t i e s , p a i n /d i s c o mf o r t , a n d a n x i e t y/d e p r e s s i o n . T h e hig h e s t s c o r e in our p a t i e nt p o p u l a t i o n w a s 1 a n d t h e lo w e s t s c o r e w a s - 0 .5 9 4 . T h e v i s u a l a n a l o g s c a l e is wh e r e t h e p a t i e nt e v a l u a t e s hi s / h e r ow n h e a l t h o n t h e da y of e v a l u a t i o n o n t h e s c a l e of 0 t o 1 0 0 . We co ll e c t e d 2 9 8 ef f e c t i v e qu e s t i o n n a i r e s o n t h e 2 n d

TA BLE 2 . RESULTS OF SF -36 T WO SURVE YS.

ON 2 N D V I S IT ON 7 TH VISIT P AVG ± S D ( N =291) AVG ± S D ( N =69)

Physical Physi c a l f un c t i o n i n g 5 4 . 4 ±3 0 .3 5 6 . 4 ± 2 9 .3 0 . 6 2 Role lim i t a t i o n du e t o p hy s i c a l p r o b l e m s 33 .5 ± 4 1 .9 3 6 . 2 ± 45 .3 0 . 6 5 B o d i l y p a i n 5 1 .7 ± 2 4 .3 5 1 . 1 ± 2 2 . 8 0 . 8 5 G e n e r a l h e a l t h 3 9 .7 ± 2 0 . 8 4 1 . 8 ± 2 0 .3 0 . 45

Mental V i t a l i t y 45 . 8 ± 2 2 .5 47.5 ± 2 0 .9 0 .5 4 S o c i a l f un c t i o n i n g 5 8 . 0 ± 25 . 6 61 . 8 ± 2 4 . 1 0 . 2 6 Role lim i t a t i o n du e t o em ot i o n a l p r o b l e m s 4 4 . 8 ± 4 6 . 0 33 . 8 ± 4 4 . 8 0 . 0 7 Ment a l h e a l t h 5 2 .9 ± 2 0 . 8 55 . 8 ± 19 . 2 0 . 2 7

AVG: Aver a g e ; SD : St a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n

TA BLE 3 . COM PARISON OF SF -36 SCORES BEFORE AND AFTER PH ARMAC ISTS’ SERVIC E

ON 2 N D V I S IT ON 7 TH VISIT P AVG ± S D ( N =67) AVG ± S D ( N =67)

Physical Physi c a l f un c t i o n i n g 49 .7 ± 2 9 . 6 5 6 .3 ± 2 9 . 4 0 . 0 5 8 Role lim i t a t i o n du e t o p hy s i c a l p r o b l e m s 3 6 . 6 ± 4 4 . 4 35 . 8 ± 45 . 4 0 .9 1 B o d i l y p a i n 5 1 . 2 ± 2 1 . 4 5 0 .9 ± 2 2 .9 0 .9 0 G e n e r a l h e a l t h 3 6 . 0 ± 19 .5 4 1 . 6 ± 2 0 .5 0 . 0 2 4

Mental V i t a l i t y 4 3 . 2 ± 2 2 .5 47.5 ± 2 1 . 0 0 . 13 S o c i a l f un c t i o n i n g 5 8 . 0 ± 2 6 . 1 61 .9 ± 2 3 .9 0 . 25 Role lim i t a t i o n du e t o em ot i o n a l p r o b l e m s 31 .3 ± 4 4 . 6 33 .3 ± 45 . 0 0 .7 5 Ment a l h e a l t h 5 0 .9 ± 2 0 . 7 55 . 1 ± 19 .3 0 . 0 6 8

Aver a g e ; SD : St a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

y = 23.536x + 50.203 R2 = 0.27727

y = 21.973 x + 46.364 R2 = 0.19997

-1.000 -0.500 0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500

Scores from descriptive system

From 2nd visit

From 7th visit Linear (From 7th visit)

Linear (From 2nd visit)

N um

be r o

f d ru

g th

er ap

y pr

ob le

m s