4. Secondary outcome ‐ satisfaction.
| Study | Measure of satisfaction | Outcome (intervention vs usual care) |
| Bernsten 2001 | Self‐reported rating of services provided, satisfaction with services, and general opinion of pharmaceutical care. Questionnaire administered by pharmacist. Results presented as percentage who agree/mainly agree | Rating of services as excellent: 73.8% vs 64.6%; satisfaction with services: 93.9% vs > 90%; general opinion: 77% (intervention group only) |
| Bond 2007 | Overall score on 15 positive and negative statements of most recent pharmacy visit (total score 15 to 75, higher scores better) | Median (IQR): 46 (40 to 55) vs 43 (38 to 49) |
| George 2016 | User satisfaction regarding use of the computer programme questionnaire (USUCPQ): an 8‐item measure based on 7‐point Likert score (max score 56, higher scores better) | Mean ± SD total satisfaction: 45.33 ± 7.81 vs 44.68 ± 6.75 |
| Hanlon 1996 | Health Care Attitude Questionnaire: 3 questions on pharmacy‐related healthcare satisfaction (directions received, explanation of SES, numbers/types of drugs) based on 5‐point Likert scale (lower scores better) | Mean ± SD total score: 5.2 ± 1.5 vs 5.4 ± 1.7 |
| Holland 2007 | Satisfaction questionnaire; usefulness of community pharmacist visits | 75 (64%) considered the visits to have been extremely or very useful |
| Lingler 2016 | Acceptability of the intervention using a set of Likert scale questions and eliciting open‐ended comments | 88% of caregivers reported intervention topics useful and relevant; 92% reported that the intervention was helpful for managing the patient's treatment plan |
| Lopez Cabezas 2006 | Catalan Health Department satisfaction survey, asking participants about the care and information received and asking them to provide a global scoring (0 to 10) | Mean ± SD 8.9 ± 1.3 vs 8.8 ± 1.5 |
| Manning 2007 | Level of satisfaction using 5‐point Likert scale (5 = highest): "How satisfied were you with the form you received from the nurse when she/he was talking to you about your medications?" | Mean ± SD 4.24 ± 0.6986 vs 4.26 ± 0.8768 |
| Naunton 2003 | Survey of intervention group only | 94% very satisfied; 84% stated information they were given 'helped a great deal' |
| Nazareth 2001 | Validated patient satisfaction questionnaire, each item scored 1 to 4, mean score per item calculated (higher = better) | Mean ± SD 3.4 ± 0.6 (n = 62) vs 3.2 ± 0.6 (n = 61) |
| Taylor 2003 | Mean ± SD number of patients with pharmacy‐related satisfaction (details unclear) | Mean ± SD 81.9 ± 4.8 (n = 33) vs 89.0 ± 6.2 (n = 36) |
| Volume 2001 | Satisfaction with pharmacy services using 34‐item instrument and 7‐point Likert scale (lower scores = better). General satisfaction extracted | Mean ± SD 1.53 ± 0.77 vs 1.62 ± 0.88 |
| Willeboordse 2017 | Medication satisfaction questionnaire assessed on a 7‐point Likert scale | B (95% CI): 0.11 (‐0.08 to 0.30) (P = 0.25) |
Outcome results presented as intervention group vs usual care group unless otherwise stated.
CI: confidence interval.
IQR: interquartile ratio.
SD: standard deviation.