Search

Introduction: Pharmacists serve an important role in rural communities, and in some cases they may be the only health professional available. Their recruitment and retention is a major concern for rural communities and health services; however, a deeper understanding regarding the advantages and challenges of sustaining a rural pharmacy workforce is somewhat limited. The aim of this study was to develop a deeper understanding of pharmacists' perspectives about factors influencing pharmacist recruitment and retention to rural and remote communities. Methods: The exploratory study, carried out in rural Tasmania and rural Western Victoria, used a qualitative descriptive design. Structured interviews, lasting between 30-60 minutes, were conducted by a single researcher using the Pharmacist Community Apgar Questionnaire via face-to-face, telephone or videoconferencing technology. Data were analysed thematically using verbatim transcription, extraction of significant statements and identification of similarities in formulated meanings, grouping the similar meanings and significant statements that pertained to the phenomena of interest. Specifically, qualitative data were used to provide a deeper understanding of factors identified as key assets, capabilities, or those most challenging for pharmacist recruitment and retention. Results: The advantages and disadvantages rural communities face in recruiting and retaining pharmacists are presented. These insights are linked to the advantages of financial income, incentives and moving allowance. Further advantages include the degree of practice autonomy, breadth of tasks, the perception of the community, loyalty to the pharmacy and its pharmacists, along with community recognition. Challenges associated with the recruitment and retention of pharmacists centred on the need for spousal or partner employment opportunities, having greater proximity to schools, access to social or cultural opportunities, along with good transport connections. Further challenges included housing, the cost of schooling for children, having adequate locum or peer coverage and opportunities to host interns. Discussion: The study provides a deeper exploration of the meaning and experiences of factors that previous research has shown are considered advantageous or challenging to the recruitment and retention of pharmacists in rural areas. Through the voices of pharmacists living and working in a rural area, the findings further enlighten our understanding regarding how the multifaceted and complex nature of health workforce planning may be addressed. As such, greater pharmacist recruitment and retention is enabled through adequate financial compensation and incentives, along with additional tax incentives for business and health services. Further, innovation is required to enhance economic sustainability. Locum coverage and intern opportunities also require innovative approaches to address concerns among potential candidates. Lastly, efforts to enable and support social connections such as schooling and spousal employment, while building community connection and a sense of rural community belonging, remain essential to recruit and retain pharmacists. Conclusion: Rural pharmacist recruitment and retention is complex, requiring a multi-pronged approach to implement practical solutions. Given this complexity and the unique features of each rural community, solutions require whole-of-community ownership to create innovative solutions. Recognition of specific advantages and challenges can address key driving factors for pharmacist recruitment and retention in rural communities.

Objectives The aim of this study was to explore the intention of health professionals to use evidence generated through an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) activity undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic to answer a time-critical research question about the delivery of community-based group programmes to rural clients via virtual technology, and describe the participating health professionals and researchers’ perceptions of the iKT partnership.Design Multimethod study incorporating qualitative and quantitative approaches.Setting Two regional health services in Victoria (Australia).Participants 26 allied health professionals (knowledge-partners) from eight disciplines across two regional health services and eight researchers from five Victorian universities.Intervention An iKT approach was used to facilitate problem identification, evidence synthesis and adaption of evidence to the local context.Data collection and analysis Participants were invited to complete a survey (knowledge-partners) and undertake a semistructured interview (knowledge-partners and researchers) on their experiences. A process log of collaborative activities tracked the type of engagement activities, who attended and the outcomes. The survey and process log results were analysed descriptively, the interviews using thematic analysis and a comparison of results approach applied to evaluate similarities and differences in the perception of the partnership from separate data collection and analysis processes.Results The survey indicated strong positive attitudes towards using research evidence in practice as well as strong intentions to use it in the future by knowledge-partners. Knowledge-partners indicated that their expertise was used in the research process, although there was greater collaboration in some steps of iKT. The context of COVID-19 facilitated collaboration between knowledge-partners and researchers through a sense of urgency and shared purpose. Rapid team development was a key mechanism that enabled iKT. Team participation was necessarily pragmatic and flexible in nature to facilitate knowledge-partner involvement. Participants suggested the iKT process was likely to result in greater end-user buy in and a powerful example of how to upskill health professionals without a significant impact on their day-to-day workload. This project was considered by knowledge-partners to be more likely to have an impact compared with other projects without a research partner.Conclusions This study highlights how researchers and knowledge-partners can work effectively and rapidly to address a time-sensitive problem of mutual interest. Establishing and nurturing rural-based researcher and knowledge-partner networks is key to enabling agile and timely responses to the changing evidence needs of the health system.

Introduction: An adequate healthcare workforce remains essential for the health of rural communities. Strategies to address rural health workforce challenges have often centred on the medical and nursing workforce; however, addressing the rural pharmacist workforce also remains critical as they are often the first point of contact for health advice. Initiatives have increased pharmacist supply; however, key issues such as poor attraction, recruitment, and retention to rural areas remain. The aim of this study was to support the recruitment and retention of pharmacists in rural areas of Australia through the development of the Pharmacy Community Apgar Questionnaire (PharmCAQ). Methods: A modified Delphi technique was employed to develop the PharmCAQ. A panel of experts were purposively selected. Eight representatives were from organisations with rural experience relevant to the study including the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia, the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, the Pharmacy Board of Australia, and a representative of a government health agency, who also leads a hospital pharmacy. Three additional participants included local and international academics with health policy and rural health workforce expertise. All participants participated in three separate focus groups of 45-60 minutes duration, where the review and refinement of factors that drive recruitment and retention of pharmacist were discussed. Face and content validity was achieved through the representatives, while internal consistency was achieved when the tool was piloted among 10 rural pharmacists in rural Victoria. Results: Fifty key factors that impact the recruitment and retention of pharmacists were identified, developed and succinctly described. All factors were grouped into five classifications: (1) geographic, (2) economic and resources, (3) practice and scope of practice, (4) practice environment and (5) community practice support. After final consensus, the factors and their definitions formed the final questionnaire. Lastly, the reliability of PharmCAQ was determined, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.852. Conclusion: While the development and use of the Apgar questionnaire for the recruitment and retention of health professionals is not a novel idea, seeking to specifically focus on pharmacists is unique. However, 10 factors were similar to factors associated with rural recruitment and retention of both physicians and nurses; they encompassed geographic, community support, and economic and resource factors. Regardless of similarities or differences between health professions in terms of recruitment and retention, as a mechanism for addressing the worsening health professional shortage currently experienced in rural areas, the PharmCAQ was developed to support the recruitment and retention of the pharmacist workforce in rural areas.

Abstract Background Recruiting and retaining medical, nursing, and allied health professionals in rural and remote areas is a worldwide challenge, compromising continuity of care and population health outcomes in these locations. Specifically, pharmacists play an essential and accessible frontline healthcare role, and are often the first point of contact for health concerns. Despite several incentives, there remains a maldistribution and undersupply of pharmacists in rural and remote areas across many parts of the world. Although current systematic reviews have focussed on factors affecting pharmacists’ retention generally, literature specifically focused on rural pharmacist workforce in a global context remains limited. The aim of this systematic review is to identify factors associated with recruitment and retention of the pharmacist workforce in rural and remote settings. Better understanding of these contributors will inform more effective interventional strategies to resolve pharmacist workforce shortages. Methods A systematic search of primary studies was conducted in online databases, including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and PsycINFO, and by hand-searching of reference lists. Eligible studies were identified based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria and methodological quality criteria, utilising the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) and Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) checklists. Results The final review included 13 studies, with quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods research design. Study-specific factors associated with recruitment and retention of pharmacists in rural practice were identified and grouped into five main themes: geographic and family-related, economic and resources, scope of practice or skills development, the practice environment, and community and practice support factors. Conclusions The results provide critical insights into the complexities of rural recruitment and retention of pharmacists and confirms the need for flexible yet multifaceted responses to overcoming rural pharmacist workforce challenges. Overall, the results provide an opportunity for rural communities and health services to better identify key strengths and challenges unique to the rural and remote pharmacist workforce that may be augmented to guide more focussed recruitment and retention endeavours.

Despite the availability of evidence-based guidelines, antibiotics for cellulitis remain inappropriately prescribed. This evidence–practice gap is more evident in low-resource settings, such as rural hospitals. This implementation study developed and introduced a cellulitis management plan to improve antibiotic prescribing for cellulitis in three health services in regional Australia. Appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing for cellulitis at Day 1 was the primary outcome measure. Adults with ICD-10-AM codes for lower-limb cellulitis admitted as inpatients of the three health services between May and November 2019 (baseline, n = 165) and March and October 2020 (post-implementation, n = 127) were included in the assessment. The uptake of the cellulitis management plan was 29.1% (37/127). The appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing for cellulitis at Day 1 was similar at baseline (78.7%, 144/183) and in the intention-to-treat post-implementation group (81.8%, 126/154) [95% CI −5.6% to 11.3%, p = 0.50]. Commencement of the cellulitis management plan resulted in a non-statistically significant increase in antibiotic appropriateness at Day 1 compared to when a cellulitis management plan was not commenced (88.1% vs. 79.5%; 95% CI −5.6% to 19.8%; p = 0.20) Evaluation of more real-world strategies to address evidence–practice gaps, such as the appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing for cellulitis, is required.

There is little guidance about developing systems for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) for general practice. A literature review identified six key components: governance, monitoring of antibiotic prescribing and resistance with feedback to prescribers, consultation support, education of the public and general practitioners, pharmacist and nurse involvement, and research, which were incorporated into a potential framework for the general practice context. Objectives: to determine the feasibility and validity of the proposed AMS framework. A secondary objective was to identify likely bodies responsible for implementation in Australia. We undertook interviews with 12 key stakeholders from government, research, and professional groups. Data were analysed with a thematic approach. The framework was considered valid and feasible. No clear organisation was identified to lead AMS implementation in general practice. The current volume-based antibiotic prescription monitoring system was considered insufficient. AMS education for the public, further development of GP education, and improved consultation support were strongly recommended. The role of community-based pharmacists and nurses is largely unexplored, but their involvement was recommended. A clear leader to drive AMS in general practice is essential for an action framework to gain traction. Monitoring and feedback of antibiotic prescribing require urgent development to include monitoring of prescribing appropriateness and patient outcomes.