Strategic insight into the thresholds & barriers to uptake of Electronic Repeat Dispensing (eRD) by therapeutic area

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The use of eRD offers a simplified process compared to paper based repeat dispensing and electronic repeat prescribing, and has several benefits for GP practices, community pharmacies and patients. It is estimated that up to 80% of all repeat prescriptions could be replaced with repeat dispensing potentially saving 2.7 million hours of GP and practice time. eRD also has the benefit of reduced medicines and can contribute towards reducing overprescribing and supporting the NHS sustainability agenda. Aim To determine if there are specific thresholds of eRD implementation by GP practices at which barriers to uptake occur. Subsequently to understand if these thresholds are associated with specific therapeutics and if the difficulty in increasing uptake is related to drug specific requirements or differing prescription management processes needed. Methods Dispensed medicines data (Oct-Dec 22, ePACT2) was analysed at practice level nationally to test the hypothesis that there are multiple thresholds of eRD implementation uptake. The percentage of practices achieving less than or equal to each incremental %eRD value was plotted against % eRD implementation. Thresholds were identified by a change in the rate of implementation uptake. Prescribing data was then analysed by BNF chapter at the identified thresholds to determine how this variation was represented clinically. Dispensed medicines data (Jul-Sept 21, North of England (NoE)) was also reviewed by pharmacists at presentation level for appropriateness as an eRD item (excludes patient level considerations). The items considered prescribable by eRD were tagged and the data re-run to estimate the maximum %eRD that might have been achieved. Ethical approval was not required for this study as it utilised non-patient identifiable population level primary care prescribing data. Results There were 8 thresholds (changes in rate of implementation) identified from the national data; occurring at 3, 9, 35, 42, 50, 57, 64 and 72% eRD. There is consistency in three of the most prescribed drug groups for eRD across all the NoE Integrated Care Systems (ICSs), which includes: lipid regulating drugs, proton pump inhibitors and renin-angiotensin system; readily implemented as eRD from the 3% threshold. The other most commonly prescribed drugs by eRD were: Beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, antiplatelets and antidiabetics. Retrospective data analysis by pharmacists determined that a maximum of 66.6% of items Jul-Sept 21 in the NoE could have been prescribed by eRD if patient factors at individual review had also considered it appropriate. Discussion/Conclusion Further clinical review and guidance on the appropriateness and requirements of specific therapeutics to be prescribed by eRD is required. For instance, rheumatic disease suppressant drugs, which require GP practices to establish monitoring arrangements in conjunction with eRD, increase from the 9% threshold. Whereas adrenoceptor agonists, requiring respiratory/inhaler reviews, increase from the 35% threshold. Further qualitative analysis is ongoing to understand the barriers occurring at different thresholds of eRD uptake. The maximum percentage of eRD achievable in the snapshot data was significantly lower than expected. This work is limited by the volume of items at presentation level that could potentially be prescribed.