Search

Background: Electronic prescription (e-prescription) was introduced in 2020 in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research aimed to explore general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists' experience with, and facilitators and barriers to, the use of e-prescription. Methods: This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with GPs and pharmacists in Greater Sydney to explore their experience with e-prescription. Thematic analysis used descriptive and mixed inductive and deductive approaches. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was used to further interpret and organise the themes. Results: Eleven GPs and nine pharmacists were interviewed. Thirteen themes were elicited, seven of which were categorised as benefits (facilitators) and six were challenges (barriers). Four facilitator themes (convenience for healthcare providers (HCPs) and patients, addressing issues with paper prescriptions, contactless nature reducing access barriers during COVID-19 lockdown, and enabling patients to manage multiple prescriptions) were mapped to the TAM construct of 'perceived usefulness'; and one facilitator (an easier process) and two barrier themes (lack of information during implementation, and technological issues) were mapped to the TAM construct of 'perceived ease of use'. Themes that fell outside these constructs were separately categorised: four barrier themes (reluctance of some patients and HCPs to change, patient expectations of 'instant prescription' and lost opportunities for best-practice care, HCPs' perceptions of inadequate governmental governance, and ongoing costs) were 'other issues with e-prescription', and two facilitator themes (providing training on the use of e-prescription for HCPs and patients, and making e-prescription more streamlined) were 'suggestions to improve'. Conclusion: There are many facilitators and barriers to the use of e-prescription. Our findings may inform the future promotion of e-prescription post-COVID-19 pandemic. Further research should focus on consumers' perspectives of e-prescription. It is inevitable that electronic prescriptions will one day supersede paper prescriptions, but there is resistance to their implementation at the practitioner and patient levels. This paper explored GPs and pharmacists' experience and views, and found that while e-prescription improves the quality of patient care, there are several challenges to its effective use. Findings may inform the future promotion of e-prescription, particularly post-COVID-19 pandemic, and guide future research in exploring consumer perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Globally, there is an increasing demand for quality medical rehabilitation services. This is the first article of a two‐part series showing the findings from the Rehabilitation Choices study in which the main aim was to understand the current landscape of decision‐making, enablers and barriers to access appropriate rehabilitation services in the Australian setting. In Part 1, these insights were sought from a healthcare professionals' perspective. Methods: This was an exploratory, qualitative study, using semi‐structured interviews with a discussion guide that was codesigned together with rehabilitation clinicians and rehabilitation researchers. Themes and sub‐themes were identified using an inductive approach. Results: We interviewed a heterogeneous group of 31 professionals who are involved in making referral decisions about rehabilitation or who design and deliver rehabilitation programs, including specialist rehabilitation physicians and other medical doctors across in‐patient, outpatient, and primary care settings, allied health professionals, rehabilitation service managers, nurses, multicultural health liaison officers and rehabilitation research scientists. Three key themes relevant to barriers and enablers to service access were identified from the data: defining rehabilitation; a lack of timely access to patient and rehabilitation service data; and patient diversity not expected by the system. Conclusions: Healthcare professionals who make decisions about rehabilitation referrals and services feel that it was necessary for them to keep up to date with information relating to rehabilitation services. There was some concern regarding what rehabilitation constituted and what services were available for different clinical indications. They also indicated that current systems did not consider diversity among patients' needs and goals. Their recommendations included the need for better communication pathways, improved referral systems and resources that could help provide best practice of rehabilitative care in the future. Patient or Public Contribution: Three study team members had a lived experience of rehabilitation as a patient or carer, and previous experience participating in qualitative research. They worked with the study team to codesign the recruitment strategy, participant‐facing communications, the interview discussion guide, and the approach to the conduct of activities with participants and in the interpretation and contextualization of findings and all were involved in writing this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]