Background A therapeutic patient education programme was created in our hospital for lung transplant recipients. Educational tools (including ‘problem situation cards’) and informative leaflets about immunosuppressive treatments were elaborated for patients and their community healthcare professionals.

Purpose The first aim of this study was to evaluate patients and healthcare professionals’ satisfaction regarding the created tools. The second aim was to assess the effectiveness of these tools in terms of improvement in patient knowledge.

Material and methods Patients transplanted for more than 1 year who had a medical consultation between 25 April and 26 May 2016 were called to obtain oral consent for enrolment in this study. The created tools were presented and used by the patients during a pharmaceutical interview, after their consultation. Patient satisfaction was evaluated with a satisfaction survey, and their knowledge about their treatments was assessed with an educational tool (number of correct answers to the problem situations presented). If gaps were found, another interview was scheduled 1 month later to reassess patient knowledge. All patients and referring healthcare professionals were contacted and asked to evaluate the leaflets aimed at community pharmacists and general practitioners with a satisfaction survey.

Results 21 patients with an average age of 53 years (25–67) and transplanted for 4 years (1–10) were included. 95% of the patients were satisfied with the information delivered during the interview and thought it was useful in their daily life. They all found the educational tools interactive and useful. 85.7% of the community pharmacists and half of the general practitioners considered that the information given on the leaflets aimed at healthcare professionals was helpful in answering patient questions during drug dispensing or consultation.

During the first interview, patients’ average knowledge score was 8.3/10. 12 patients with a score equal to or lower than 8/10 had another interview to reassess their knowledge. These patients’ average score increased from 7.5 to 8.6 (p<0.0083) at M1.

Conclusion Both patients and healthcare professionals were satisfied with the tools created. Conducting a pharmaceutical interview improved patients’ knowledge of their treatments, which highlights the importance of the pharmacist intervention in their care pathway, together with community healthcare professionals.

No conflict of interest