Exploring patients’ perspectives of pharmacist supplementary prescribing in Scotland
- 535 Downloads
Aim The aim of this study was to explore patients’ perspectives and experiences of pharmacist supplementary prescribing (SP) in Scotland. Method A survey in primary and secondary care in Scotland. Pharmacist supplementary prescribers (n = 10) were purposively selected across Scotland. All pharmacists distributed questionnaires to 20 consecutive patients as they attended appointments during October to December 2006. Reminders were mailed to all 20 patients by each pharmacist 2 weeks after initial distribution. Main outcome measures The questionnaire contained items on: attitudes towards pharmacist SP derived from earlier qualitative research; consultation satisfaction derived from a validated scale developed initially for general practitioners, with the term ‘doctor’ being replaced by ‘pharmacist prescriber’; and demographics. Closed and Likert scales were used as response options. Results One pharmacist withdrew. The patient response rate was 57.2% (103/180). The median age was 67 years (interquartile range 56.5–73 years), with 53.4% being female. Most (76, 73.8%) consulted with the pharmacist in a general practice setting. Patients reported positive consultation experiences with 89.3% agreeing/strongly agreeing that they were satisfied with the consultation, 78.7% thought the pharmacist told them everything about their treatment and 72.9% felt the pharmacist was interested in them as a person. Most patients were positive in their attitudes, agreeing that they would recommend a pharmacist prescriber to others and that they had trust in the pharmacist. However, 65% would prefer to consult a doctor. Conclusion Most patient respondents were satisfied with, and had a positive attitude towards, pharmacist prescribing consultations. However, most patients would still elect to see a doctor given the choice.
KeywordsPharmacist prescribing Supplementary prescribing Patient satisfaction Patient views Scotland
We acknowledge support from the participating pharmacists and their patients, and A Bowbyes (for excellent administrative support).
This research was funded by NHS Education for Scotland (Pharmacy).
Conflicts of Interest
- 2.Department of Health. Improving patients’ access to medicines: a guide to implementing nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing within the NHS in England. London: Department of Health; 2006.Google Scholar
- 8.Smalley L. Patients’ experience of pharmacist-led supplementary prescribing in primary care. Pharm J. 2006;276:567–9.Google Scholar
- 11.Department of Health. Creating a patient-led NHS: delivering the NHS improvement plan. NHS Crown Copyright; 2005.Google Scholar
- 17.Salter C, Holland R, Harvey I, Henwood K. “I haven’t even phoned my doctor yet.” The advice giving role of the pharmacist during consultations for medication review with patients aged 80 or more: qualitative discourse analysis. BMJ. 2007;334(7603):1101–8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39171.577106.55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Stewart D, George J, Bond C, Cunningham S, Diack L, McCaig D. Evaluating supplementary prescribing by pharmacists in Scotland. Report submitted to NHS Education for Scotland, 2007.Google Scholar
- 20.DeVellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. California: Sage Publications; 1991.Google Scholar
- 22.Outline curriculum for training programmes to prepare pharmacist supplementary prescribers. http://www.rpsgb.org.uk/pdfs/supplprescphoutlcurric.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2006.
- 23.National Office for Summative Assessment. http://www.nosa.org.uk/information/video/introduction.htm. Accessed 14 November 2007.