Open Access‘It's showed me the skills that he has’: pharmacists' and mentors' views on pharmacist supplementary prescribing
Author(s) -
Lloyd Fran,
Parsons Carole,
Hughes Carmel M.
Publication year - 2010
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 - 10.1211/ijpp.18.01.0006
Subject(s) - medicine , pharmacist , context (archaeology) , workload , focus group , nursing , family medicine , medical prescription , health care , pharmacy , paleontology , marketing , computer science , business , biology , operating system , economics , economic growth
Objectives Supplementary prescribing has seen pharmacists assume greater responsibility for prescribing in collaboration with doctors. This study explored the context and experiences, in relation to the practice of supplementary prescribing, of pharmacists and physicians (who acted as their training mentors) at least 12 months after pharmacists had qualified as supplementary prescribers. Methods The setting was primary and secondary healthcare sectors in Northern Ireland. Pharmacists and mentors who had participated in a pre‐training study were invited to take part. All pharmacists ( n = 47) were invited to participate in focus groups, while mentors ( n = 35) were asked to participate in face‐to‐face semi‐structured interviews. The research took place between May 2005 and September 2007. All discussions and interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using constant comparison. Key findings Nine pharmacist focus groups were convened (number per group ranging from three to six; total n = 40) and 31 semi‐structured interviews with mentors were conducted. The six main themes that emerged were optimal practice setting, professional progression for prescribing pharmacists, outcomes for prescribing pharmacists, mentors and patients, relationships, barriers to implementation and the future of pharmacist prescribing. Where practised, pharmacist prescribing had been accepted, worked best for chronic disease management, was perceived to have reduced doctors' workload and improved continuity of care for patients. However, three‐quarters of pharmacists qualified to practise as supplementary prescribers were not actively prescribing, largely due to logistical and organisational barriers rather than inter‐professional tensions. Independent prescribing was seen as contentious by mentors, particularly because of the diagnostic element. Conclusions Supplementary prescribing has been successful where it has been implemented but a number of barriers remain which are preventing the wider acceptance of this practice innovation.