Open AccessA community pharmacy‐based cardiovascular screening service: views of service users and the public
Author(s) -
Taylor Julia,
Krska Janet,
Mackridge Adam
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
international journal of pharmacy practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.42
H-Index - 37
eISSN - 2042-7174
pISSN - 0961-7671
DOI - 10.1111/j.2042-7174.2012.00190.x
Subject(s) - medicine , pharmacy , service (business) , family medicine , population , public health , nursing , environmental health , economy , economics
Objectives To determine whether pharmacy‐based cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening reached the desired population, the local population's awareness of pharmacy screening and the views of service users and the general public about CVD screening. Methods Pharmacy staff, located in one English Primary Care Trust providing a CVD screening service, issued questionnaires to service users who had undergone screening. Face‐to‐face street surveys were conducted with members of the general public within the vicinity of each participating pharmacy. Key findings A total of 259 people were screened within the first 6 months of service provision, 97 of whom (37.4%) completed the evaluation questionnaire. In addition, 261 non‐service users participated in street surveys. Most respondents among both service users and non‐users had at least one risk factor for cardiovascular disease, including smoking and lack of exercise. Responses to statements regarding CVD screening showed a high level of agreement with the need for screening in both groups. However, significantly more service users (90.7%) agreed that a pharmacy was a good place for screening compared to the non‐users (77.4%; P < 0.005). Likewise significantly fewer service users agreed that screening should be only carried out by doctors (10.3 compared to 25.3% of non‐users; P < 0.005). The overall majority of service users 96 (99.7%) had a positive experience of the screening service, agreeing that they were given enough time and pharmacists made them feel at ease. Only 9% of non‐users were aware of the pharmacy service and, although the majority (78.4%) were willing to be screened at a pharmacy, this was significantly lower among males than females (69.9 compared to 82.7%; P < 0.005). Perceived concerns about confidentiality and lack of privacy were among barriers identified to taking up screening. Conclusion Pharmacy‐based CVD screening is acceptable to the public. Its uptake could be improved through increased awareness of the service and by addressing concerns about privacy and confidentiality in promotional activities.