Search

Background: Little is known about patients' opinions upon the development of non-medical prescribing (NMP)., Objective: To explore the opinions of patients on the development of NMP., Methods: In-depth interviews using qualitative methodology (Interpretative Phenomological Analysis). Eighteen interviews were undertaken in Bristol (Sites 1 and 3), Swindon (Site 2) and Brighton (Site 4). [Site 1 = primary care, GP prescriber (n = 5), Site 2 = secondary care, consultant prescriber (n = 5), Site 3 = primary care (n = 5) and Site 4 = secondary care (n = 3) (both pharmacist supplementary prescribers.] Participants (n = 18) were randomly sampled from patients under the care of the participating prescriber. Participants were aged between 42 and 81 years of age (n = 11 male and n = 7 female). Interviews took place between January and August 2006., Results: Participants expressed concerns about clinical governance, privacy and whether sufficient space were available to provide the service in community pharmacies. Participants acknowledged the expert drug knowledge of pharmacists and their accessibility. These factors enhanced acceptability of this role for pharmacists. Nurses were highly regarded, accepted and preferred as prescribers with few concerns., Conclusions: The results indicate support for pharmacists and nurses as prescribers, which aid successful implementation. Further research may be needed to evaluate the level of understanding that the public has of NMP and their views of the service once NMP is more widely established. Stakeholders should be mindful that the public may be hesitant regarding the professionalism, quality and clinical governance standards of clinics in community pharmacies in particular.

Unlabelled: OBJECTIVE (OF THE STUDY): To provide data on the views of chief pharmacists (CPs) and primary care trust pharmacists (PCTPs) on the risks and concerns surrounding supplementary prescribing., Setting: Secondary and primary care within England., Method: Postal questionnaire surveys of chief pharmacists and primary care trust pharmacists., Main Outcome Measure: Significance of the association between the extracted factors., Results: The response rate was 68% for both the primary care (183/271) and secondary care surveys (97/143). The survey tool was subjected to factor analysis and reliability testing. For both sectors, the three factors that were extracted described concerns over the training model for supplementary prescribing, concerns about the professional competency/responsibility of the supplementary prescribers once trained, and positivity about the implementation of supplementary prescribing. For both sectors, as trusts have more experience of supplementary prescribing by nurses, the respondents had less concerns about the supplementary prescribing training model. For secondary care, as the total number of pharmacists employed within the trust increases, the respondents had less concerns over the limitations of the supplementary prescribing training model., Conclusion: Although both sectors have concerns over the training model for supplementary prescribing and also professional competence and responsibility once trainees qualify, there is overall a positive attitude towards supplementary prescribing and there is a belief that pharmacists wish to take this role on.

Purpose: The implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists within primary care trusts (PCTs) and secondary care trusts (SCTs) in England was studied., Methods: A survey was developed and sent to pharmacists in PCTs and SCTs in England who would oversee the implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists., Results: The response rate was 68% for both surveys. The majority of SCTs and PCTs intended to implement supplementary prescribing by pharmacists by the end of 2005 (57% and 56%, respectively). The majority of SCT respondents did not believe that it would be more difficult to recruit designated medical practitioners to supervise supplementary prescribing training for pharmacists as opposed to nurses (67%, n = 43), whereas the largest group of PCT pharmacists believed it would be (47%, n = 86). Within secondary care, the clinical areas in which pharmacists were intending to work as supplementary prescribers were those where they already had established roles. Within primary care, the main clinical areas for pharmacists were influenced by those areas in the new General Medical Services contract Quality and Outcomes Framework for general practitioners., Conclusion: A survey investigating the implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists in England found that there were significantly more barriers to its establishment within primary care than secondary care settings. Within primary care, supplementary prescribing is being implemented to develop new services. Within secondary care, the supplementary prescribing model is more often used to legitimize services already being provided.