Search

Background: Pharmacists' clinical decision-making is a core process in pharmaceutical care. However, the practical aspects and effective teaching methods of this process remain largely unexplored., Objective: To examine the cognitive processes involved in pharmacists' perceptions of how they make clinical decisions in pharmacy practice., Methods: Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with pharmacists working in community, outpatient, and hospital care in the Netherlands between August and December 2021. Participants were explicitly asked for examples when asked how they make clinical decisions in practice and how they teach this to others. After transcribing audio-recorded interviews, an inductive thematic analysis was conducted to identify cognitive processes. A theoretical model of clinical decision-making was then used and adapted to structure the identified processes., Results: In total, 21 cognitive processes were identified from interviews with 16 pharmacists working in community (n = 5), outpatient (n = 2), and hospital care (n = 9). These cognitive processes were organized into 8 steps of the adapted theoretical model, i.e. problem and demand for care consideration, information collection, clinical reasoning, clinical judgment, shared decision-making, implementation, outcomes evaluation, and reflection. Pharmacists struggled to articulate their clinical decision-making and went back-and-forth in their explanations of this process. All pharmacists emphasized the importance of identifying the problem and described how they collect information through reviewing, gathering, recalling, and investigating. Clinical reasoning entailed various cognitive processes, of which comprehending the problem in the patient's context was deemed challenging at times. Pharmacists seemed least active in evaluating patient outcomes and reflecting on these outcomes., Conclusions: Pharmacists use multiple cognitive processes when making clinical decisions in pharmacy practice, and their back-and-forth explanations emphasize its dynamic nature. This study adds to a greater understanding of how pharmacists make clinical decisions and to the development of a theoretical model that describes this process, which can be used in pharmacy practice and education., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pharmacists' clinical decision-making is considered a core process of pharmaceutical care in pharmacy practice, but little is known about the factors influencing this process., Objective: To identify factors influencing clinical decision-making among pharmacists working in pharmacy practice., Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with pharmacists working in primary, secondary, and tertiary care settings in the Netherlands between August and December 2021. A thematic analysis was conducted using an inductive approach. The emerged themes were categorized into the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model domains., Results: In total, 16 pharmacists working in primary care (n = 7), secondary care (n = 4) or tertiary care (n = 5) were interviewed. Factors influencing pharmacists' capability to make clinical decisions are a broad theoretical knowledge base, clinical experience, and skills, including contextualizing data, clinical reasoning, and clinical judgment. The pharmacy setting, data availability, rules and regulations, intra- and interprofessional collaboration, education, patient perspectives, and time are mentioned as factors influencing their opportunity. Factors influencing pharmacists' motivation are confidence, curiosity, critical thinking, and responsibility., Conclusions: The reported factors covered all domains of the COM-B model, implying that clinical decision-making is influenced by a combination of pharmacists' capability, opportunity, and motivation. Addressing these different factors in pharmacy practice and education may improve pharmacists' clinical decision-making, thereby improving patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)