Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Original research
Organising polypharmacy: unpacking medicines, unpacking meanings—an ethnographic study
  1. Deborah Swinglehurst,
  2. Nina Fudge
  1. Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Deborah Swinglehurst; d.swinglehurst{at}qmul.ac.uk

Abstract

Objectives We explore how older patients affected by polypharmacy manage the ‘hidden work’ of organising their medicines, how they make sense of this work and integrate it into their lives.

Design and setting Ethnographic study observing patients over 18–24 months in patients’ homes, general practice and community pharmacy, in England, UK.

Participants and methods Ethnographic case study including longitudinal follow-up of 24 patients aged 65 or older and prescribed ten or more items of medication. Our dataset includes: 562 hours of ethnographic observation across patients homes, community pharmacies and general practices; 47 audio-recorded interviews with patients about their lives and medicines practices; cultural probes (photographs, body maps, diaries and imagined ‘wishful thinking’ conversations); fieldnotes from regular home visits; telephone calls, and observation/video-recording of healthcare encounters. We apply a ‘practice theory’ lens to our analysis, illuminating what is being accomplished, why and by whom.

Results All patients had developed strategies and routines for organising medicines into their lives, negotiating medicine taking to enable acceptable adherence and make their medicines manageable. Strategies adopted by patients often involved the use of ‘do-it-yourself’ dosette boxes. This required careful ‘organising’ work similar to that done by pharmacy staff preparing multicompartment compliance aids (MCCAs). Patients incorporated a range of approaches to manage supplies and flex their regimens to align with personal values and priorities. Practices of organising medicines are effortful, creative and often highly collaborative. Patients strive for adherence, but their organisational efforts privilege ‘living with medicines’ over taking medicines strictly ‘as prescribed’.

Conclusions Polypharmacy demands careful organising. The burden of organising polypharmacy always falls somewhere, whether undertaken by pharmacists as they prepare MCCAs or by patients at home. Greater appreciation among prescribers of the nature and complexity of this work may provide a useful point of departure for tackling the key issue that sustains it: polypharmacy.

  • qualitative research
  • primary care
  • therapeutics

Data availability statement

No data are available. Our ethics approval was granted based on the anonymity of the individuals consenting to participate and our participant information sheets and consent forms reflected this. Our research participants have not consented to making our raw data publicly available.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

No data are available. Our ethics approval was granted based on the anonymity of the individuals consenting to participate and our participant information sheets and consent forms reflected this. Our research participants have not consented to making our raw data publicly available.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Twitter @ninafudge

  • Contributors DS designed the study and secured funding. Both authors jointly gathered and analysed data. DS wrote the first draft of the paper. Both authors revised and finalised the manuscript. DS is the guarantor.

  • Funding This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) through a Clinician Scientist Award (DS). In addition, NF was (in part) supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North Thames at Bart’s Health NHS Trust.

  • Disclaimer The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research. Refer to the Methods section for further details.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.