Advertisement

Qualitative Methods in Pharmacy Practice Research

  • Susanne KaaeEmail author
  • Janine Marie Traulsen
Chapter

Abstract

Qualitative research within pharmacy practice is concerned with understanding the behavior of actors such as pharmacy staff, pharmacy owners, patients, other healthcare professionals, and politicians to explore various types of existing practices and beliefs in order to improve them. As qualitative research attempts to answer the “why” questions, it is useful for describing, in rich detail, complex phenomena that are situated and embedded in local contexts. Typical methods include interviews, observation, document analysis, and netnography. Qualitative research has to live up to a set of rigid quality criteria of research conduct to provide trustworthy results that contribute to the further development of the area.

Keywords

Qualitative Research Interview Guide Focus Group Interview Pharmacy Practice Pharmacy Staff 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Almarsdottir AB, Kaae S, Traulsen JM (2014) Opportunities and challenges in social pharmacy and pharmacy practice research. Res Soc Adm Pharm 10(1):252–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradley F, Ashcroft DM, Noyce PR (2012) Integration and differentiation: a conceptual model of general practitioner and community pharmacist collaboration. Res Soc Adm Pharm 8:36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cavaco AM, Dias JP, Bates IP (2005) Consumers’ perceptions of community pharmacy in Portugal: a qualitative exploratory study. Pharm World Sci 27(1):54–60CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Emmerton LM, Smith L, LemAy KS, Krass I, Saini B, Bosnic-Anticevich SZ, Reddel HK, Burton DL, Stewart K, Armour CL (2012) Experiences of community pharmacists involved in the delivery of a specialist asthma service in Australia. BMC Health Serv Res 12:164. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-164 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Fedder DO, Levine DL, Patterson Russell R et al (1998) Strategies to implement a patient counseling and medication tickler system — a study of Maryland pharmacists and their hypertensive patients. Patient Educ Couns 11:53–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gastelurrutia MA, Benrimoj SI, Castrillon CC et al (2008) Facilitators for practice change in Spanish community pharmacy. Pharm World Sci 31(1):32–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hassell K, Hibbert D (1996) The use of focus groups in pharmacy research: processes and practicalities. J Soc Adm Pharm 14(4):169–177Google Scholar
  8. Ho I, Nielsen L, Jacobsgaard H, Salmasi H, Pottegård A (2014) Chat-based telepharmacy in Denmark: design and early results. Int J Pharm Pract. doi: 10.1111/ijpp.12109 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaae S, Søndergaard B, Haugbølle LS, Traulsen JM (2010) Development of a qualitative exploratory case study research method to explore sustained delivery of cognitive services. Pharm World Sci 32:36–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaae S, Søndergaard B, Haugbølle LS, Traulsen JM (2011) The relationship between leadership style and provision of the first Danish publicly reimbursed CPS—a qualitative multi-case study. Res Soc Adm Pharm 7:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kozinets R (2010) Netnography: doing ethnographic research online. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Kvale S (1996) Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage, London. ISBN 0-8039-5819-6Google Scholar
  13. Latif A, Boardman H, Pollock K (2011) Reasons involved in selecting patients for a Medicines Use Review (MUR): exploring pharmacist and staff choices. Int J Pharm Pract 19(Suppl1):31–33Google Scholar
  14. Mak VS, Clark A, Poulsen JH, Udengaard KU, Gilbert AL (2012) Pharmacists’ awareness of Australia’s health care reforms and their beliefs and attitudes about their current and future roles. Int J Pharm Pract 20(1):33–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Malterud K (2001) Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet 358(11):483–488CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Mays N, Pope C (1995) Observational methods in health care settings. BMJ 311:182–184CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. McCambridge J, Witton J, Elbourne D (2014) Systematic review of the Hawthorne effect: new concepts are needed to study research participation effects. J Clin Epidemiol 67(3):267–277CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. McDonough RP, Doucette WR (2001) Developing collaborative working relationships between pharmacists and physicians. J Am Pharm Assoc 41(5):682–692Google Scholar
  19. Mobach MP (2007) Consumer behavior in the waiting area. Pharm World Sci 29(1):3–6CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Morgan DL (1988) Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Murad MS, Chatterley T, Guirguis LM (2014) A meta-narrative review of recorded patient-pharmacist interactions: exploring biomedical or patient-centered communication? Res Soc Adm Pharm 10:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Robson C (2002) Real world research. A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Chap 11: Observational methods, 2nd edn. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith F (1998) Focus groups and observation studies. Int J Pharm Pract 6:229–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Traulsen JM, Klinke BO (2005) Project handbook—from idea to project—a handbook for pharmacy projects. The Danish University of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Copenhagen, 27 pp (English). ISBN 87-990703-1-6Google Scholar
  25. van Hulten R, Blom L, Mattheusens J, Wolters M, Bouvy M (2011) Communication with patients who are dispensed a first prescription of chronic medication in the community pharmacy. Patient Educ Couns 83(3):417–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Walsh KE, Chui MA, Kleser MA, Williams SM, Sutter SL, Sutter JG (2003) Exploring the impact of an automated prescription-filling device on community pharmacy technician workflow. J Am Pharm Assoc 51(5):613–618Google Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (2010) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 4 edn. Sage, London. ISBN 978-1-41297-417-2Google Scholar
  2. Flick U (2009) An introduction to qualitative research, 4 edn. Sage, London. ISBN 978-1-84787-323-1Google Scholar
  3. Garfield S, Hibberd R, Barber N (2013) English community pharmacists’ experiences of using electronic transmission of prescriptions: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 13:435. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-435 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Giacomini MK, Cook DJ (2000) Are the results of the study valid? For the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 284(3):357–362. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.3.357 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Kozinets RV (1998) Netnography: initial reflections on consumer research investigations of cyberculture in NA. In: Alba JW, Wesley Hutchinson J (eds) Advances in consumer research, Vol 25. Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp 366–371Google Scholar
  6. Kozinets RV (2002) The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online communities. J Market Res 39(1):61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry, Chap. 11: Establishing trustworthiness. Sage, London, pp 289–331. ISBN 0-8039-2431-3Google Scholar
  8. Thurmond V (2001) The point of triangulation. J Nurs Scholarsh 33(3):254–256. http://www.ruralhealth.utas.edu.au/gr/resources/docs/the-point-of-triangulation.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, Department of PharmacyUniversity of CopenhagenKøbenhavnDenmark

Personalised recommendations