Final report; Royal Pharmaceutical Society; 2012. 2. Horne, R., Hankins, M. and Jenkins, R; The Satisfaction BGJ398 ic50 with Information about Medicines Scale (SIMS): a new measurement tool for audit and research; Quality in Health Care;2001; 10; 135–140. K. Hodsona, M. Smitha, A. Blenkinsoppb, L. Hughesa, D. Jamesa, D. Cohenc, P. Daviesc, C. O’Briena, L. Turnbullc, F. Alamc, M. Longleyc aCardiff University, Cardiff, UK, bBradford University, Bradford, UK, cUniversity of South

Wales, Pontypridd, UK The National Electronic Claim and Audit Form data was used to generate a profile of the Discharge Medicines Review (DMR) Service in Wales. Almost three quarters of community pharmacies have participated, with high variation in the number of DMRs completed per pharmacy: 5% have completed >100 DMRs whilst 36% have completed between 1 and 9. The overall discrepancy rate was 1.3 per DMR. Further work is required to identify the reasons for the variation in service and uptake by pharmacies and pharmacists. The Discharge Medicines Review (DMR) Service aims to improve the management of medicines by reconciling a patient’s medicines following discharge Bortezomib order of the patient from a care setting and supporting patient adherence. For a pharmacy to make a claim for a completed DMR, information from the DMR forms are inputted into the National Electronic Claim and Audit Form (NECAF), for example

number of medicines on the patient’s discharge information from the care setting and first prescription by the General Practitioner (GP) and the number and nature of discrepancies between the two. The study’s objective was to generate a

profile of the DMR service by analysing the NECAF data. The NECAF database containing all claims from October 2011 until the end of December 2013 was obtained and analysed using Microsoft Access® and Excel®. The analysis was verified by NHS Wales Shared Services Partnership. Numbers of completed DMRs and of pharmacies and pharmacists engaged with the service were calculated Janus kinase (JAK) and the number, type and range of discrepancies were identified. Data were analysed by community pharmacy ownership type: independents, small chain (2–4), medium sized multiple (5–25) and large sized multiple (>25) chains and supermarkets. A total of 14, 649 DMRs had been completed and payment claimed. Seventy percent (n = 520) of community pharmacies claimed payment for one DMR, whilst 224 (30%) had not claimed payment for any DMRs. Of the latter group, 70 had not claimed for either a DMR or Medicines Use Review (MUR) during the 27 month period. Among the pharmacies that had provided at least one DMR, the range varied considerably (5% had completed >100 DMRs and 36% had completed between 1 and 9 DMRs). Engagement with the scheme varied by pharmacy ownership type. Large multiples completed 56% of all DMRs, followed by the independents (31%). Supermarket pharmacies had the lowest rate of DMR per pharmacy store.