Advertisement

Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 30, Issue 5, pp 526–535 | Cite as

Exploring the supply of non-prescription medicines from community pharmacies in Scotland

  • Margaret C. WatsonEmail author
  • Jo Hart
  • Marie Johnston
  • Christine M. Bond
Research Article

Abstract

Objective The objectives of this study were to: (1) explore pharmacy support staff (PSS) opinions of and attitudes towards the supply of non-prescription medicines (NPMs); (2) assess whether NPM supply is compliant with professional and good practice guidelines. Methods This exploratory study was conducted in community pharmacies in Grampian, Scotland, and comprised non-participant observation of NPM consultations, semi-structured interviews with, and a questionnaire of, PSS. Guideline compliance was assessed by a consensus group of practising community pharmacists. Main outcome measures The percentage of consultations which achieved compliance with professional guidelines was calculated. A total score was also calculated for each consultation to assess compliance with good practice guidelines. Results Fifty-seven support staff from 21 pharmacies participated in at least one component of the study. In total, 195 observed consultations were evaluable. Fifty-four participants completed a questionnaire and 95 post-consultation interviews were completed. Most consultations involved product requests and were for self-treatment. Overall, interviewees were satisfied or very satisfied with 78 (83.0%) and 14 (14.9%) of all consultations, respectively. Participants’ self-reported scores for the quality of consultation were high indicating that they perceived their consultations to be appropriate. Most PSS were aware of good practice guidelines and thought their use was important/very important, yet few consultations were fully guideline compliant. Non-product consultations were more guideline compliant than product consultations. Just over one third (35.6%) of consultations established whether other medication was being used by the intended recipient of the NPM. Few PSS (21.2%) had read the professional guidelines and as such, compliance with these guidelines was extremely low. The percentage of guideline compliant consultations were 6.6% (n = 5) (sufficient information gathered), 13.2% (n = 10) (adequate advice/information provision), 46.1% (n = 35) (personal involvement of pharmacist), 21.1% (n = 16) (particular care of specific patient groups) and 28.9% (n = 22) (pharmacist involvement with specific NPMs). Conclusion Few consultations for NPMs in this study were fully guideline compliant. The reasons for non-compliance with good practice and professional guidelines need to be explored. Although failure to comply with professional guidelines could be due to PSS’s lack of awareness, this does not explain non-compliance with good practice guidelines.

Keywords

Guideline adherence Pharmacies Professional practice Questionnaires Interview Observation Self care Non-prescription medication OTC Scotland 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank all the PSS who participated in this study. We are particularly grateful to Ms S. Campbell, Co-ordinator for the Northern Node for the Scottish Professionals and Practices Involved in Research (SPPIRe), who assisted in the recruitment of pharmacies for this study.

Funding

MW was funded by a Medical Research Council (UK) Special Training Fellowship in Health Services Research.

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Blenkinsopp A, Bond CM. Over-the-counter medication. London: BMA; 2005.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Bibliography: prescription only medicines reclassified to pharmacy only medicines. London: RPSGB; 2004 October.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Flint J. Training requirements for medicines counter assistants. Pharm J 1996;256:858–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    NPA launches training with a W-WHAM. Pharm J 1989;243(July 8th):40.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Medicines, Ethics and Practice. London: RPSGB; 2005. Report No: 29 (ISBN:0-85369-630-6).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Department of Health. Self care—a real choice. London: Department of Health; 2005. Report No: 266322.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shi C, Gralnek IM, Dulai GS, Towfigh A, Asch S. Consumer usage patterns of nonprescription histamine2-receptor antagonists. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99(4):606–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ferris D, Nyirjesy P, Sobel J, Soper D, Pavletic A, Litaker M. Over-the-counter antifungal drug misuse associated with patient-diagnosed vulvovaginal candidiasis. Obstet Gynaecol 2002;99(3):419–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sihvo S, Klaukka T, Martikainen J, Hemminki E. Frequency of daily over-the-counter drug use and potential clinically significant over-the-counter-prescription drug interactions in the Finnish adult population. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000;56:495–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Watson MC, Bond CM, Grimshaw JM, Mollison J, Ludbrook A, Walker A. Educational strategies to promote evidence-based community pharmacy practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). Fam Pract 2002;19:529–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roumie CL, Griffin MR. Over-the-counter analgesics in older adults. Drugs Aging 2004;21(8):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Watson MC, McCloughan L. How the Scottish School of Primary Care can help pharmacists. Pharm J 2004;272(7282):63–4.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Altman D. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991 (ISBN: 0-412-27630-5).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991;50:179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Green M. How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behav Res 1991;26(3):499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Watson MC, Bond CM. The evidence based supply of non-prescription medicines: barriers and beliefs. IJPP 2004;12(June):65–72.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Last JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995. p. 81.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    John DN, Krska J, Hansford D. Are customers requesting medicines by name less likely to be advised or referred? Provision of over-the-counter H2-receptor antagonists and alginate products from pharmacists. Int J Pharm Pract 2003;11:33–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Berger K, Eickhoff C, Schulz M. Counselling quality in community pharmacies: implementation of the pseudo customer methodology in Germany. J Clin Pharm Ther 2005;30:45–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Benrimoj SI, Gilbert AL. A program to develop and test a mechanism to raise national standards of practice for the provision of pharmacist only and pharmacy medicines in Australian community pharmacy. Sydney: University of Sydney; 2002 April.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. Standards for the provision of pharmacist only and pharmacy medicines in community pharmacy. Australia; 1999.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Developing and implementing standard operating procedures for dispensing (SOPs). London: RPSGB; 2001. (www.rpsgb.org.uk/pdfs/sops.pdf).
  23. 23.
    Watson MC, Bond CM, Johnston M, Mearns K. Using human error theory to explore the supply of non-prescription medicines from community pharmacies. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:244–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prayle D, Brazier M. Supply of medicines: paternalism, autonomy and reality. J Med Ethics 1998;24:93–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pilnick A. ‘Why didn’t you say just that?’ Dealing with issues of asymmetry, knowledge and competence in the pharmacist/client encounter. Sociol Health Illn 1998;20(1):29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sleath B. Pharmacist-patient relationships: authoritarian, participatory, or default? Patient Educ Coun 1996;28:253–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Westerlund T, Andersson I, Marklund B. The quality of self-care counselling by pharmacy practitioners, supported by IT-based clinical guidelines. PWS 2007;29:67–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vainio K, Airaksinen M, Hyykky T, Enlund K. Effect of therapeutic class on counseling in community pharmacies. Ann Pharmacother 2002;36(5):781–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Emmerton L, Shaw J. The influence of pharmacy staff in non-prescription medicine sales. Int J Pharm Pract 2002;10:101–6.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Norris P. Which sort of pharmacies provide more patient counselling? J Health Serv Res Policy 2002;7(Supplement 1):23–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tully M, Hassell K, Noyce P. Advice-giving in community pharmacies in the UK. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2(1):38–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Banks J, Shaw A, Weiss MC. Walking a line between health care and sales: the role of the medicines counter assistant. Pharm J 2005;274(7349):586–9.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bond C, Hannaford P. Issues related to monitoring the safety of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. Drug Saf 2003;26(15):1065–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Watson M, Bond CM, Grimshaw JM, Johnston M. Factors predicting the guideline compliant supply (or non-supply) of non-prescription medicines in the community pharmacy setting. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:53–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret C. Watson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jo Hart
    • 1
  • Marie Johnston
    • 1
  • Christine M. Bond
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General Practice and Primary CareUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations