Advertisement

Action Research in Pharmacy Practice

  • Lotte Stig NørgaardEmail author
  • Ellen Westh Sørensen
Chapter
  • 1.3k Downloads

Abstract

Action research (AR) is based on a collaborative problem-solving relationship between researcher and client, and the aims of this research are to solve the problem and to generate new knowledge. The chapter describes and shows how several different methods might be used for data collection in an AR-based study. Concepts related to AR are described; in addition, the multifaceted role of the action researcher is described, along with a set of data quality criteria for evaluating the quality of an AR-based study. Then follows a thorough description of a Danish AR-based pharmacy practice study. The chapter concludes with a list of experience-based recommendations for others who are interested in running an AR-based study. This is followed by an Appendix describing four different AR-based studies.

Keywords

Action research Denmark Pharmacy practice Researcher role Data quality Strengths Weaknesses Recommendations 

References

  1. Agerholm H, Sørensen EW (2006) Developing community pharmacy by detecting drug related problems—an action research project. Poster, FIP: Salvador, Bahia, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  2. Børsting I, Nielsen JCR, Sørensen EW (1989) Apotek på en anden måde: Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne. KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  3. Bradley HA (2013) Roles and competencies of district pharmacists: a case study from Cape Town. PhD thesis. http://hdl.handle.net/11394/3255
  4. Coghlan D, Brannick T (2005) Doing action research in your own organization, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Fals-Borda O (2001) Participatory (action) research in social theory: origins and challenges. In: Bradbury H, Reason P (eds) Handbook of action research. Sage Publications, London, pp 27–37Google Scholar
  6. Gilbert AL, Roughead EE, Beilby J, Mott K, Barrarr JD (2002) Collaborative medication management services: improving patient care. Med J Aust 177:189–192PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hart E, Bond B (1995) Action research for health and social care. Open University Press, BuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  8. Haugbølle LS, Sørensen EW (2006a) Drug-related problems in patients with angina pectoris, type 2 diabetes and asthma – interviewing patients at home. Pharm World Sci 28:239–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Haugbølle LS, Sørensen EW (2006) Workshop IV: developing participatory action research in pharmaceutical care. In: 4th international working conference on pharmaceutical care research—beyond the pharmacy perspective. Workshop leadership and lectures, Hillerød, February 2005Google Scholar
  10. Haugbølle LS, Sørensen EW, Gundersen B, Lorentzen L, Petersen KH (2002a) Basing pharmacy counselling on the perspective of the angina pectoris patient. Pharm World Sci 24(2):71–78CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Haugbølle LS, Sørensen EW, Henriksen HH (2002b) Medication- and illness-related factual knowledge, perceptions and behaviour in angina pectoris patients. Patient Educ Couns 47:281–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Holter IM, Schwartz-Barcott D (1993) Action research: what is it? How has it been used and how can it be used in nursing? J Adv Nurs 18:298–304CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Jagosh J et al (2012) Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q 90(2):311–46CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaae S, Sørensen EW, Nørgaard LS (2011) Exploring communications around medication review in community pharmacy. Int J Clin Pharm 33:529–536CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaae S, Sørensen EW, Nørgaard LS (2014) Evaluation of a Danish pharmacist student—physician medication review collaboration model. Int J Clin Pharm 36(3):615–622CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lalonde L et al (2014) Development of an interprofessional program for cardiovascular prevention in primary care: a participatory research approach. Sage Open Medicine. DOI: 10.1177/2050312114522788Google Scholar
  17. Launsø L, Rieper O (2005) Forskning om og med mennesker [Research on and with people. In Danish only]. NNF Arnold Busck, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  18. Mclaughlin CP, Kaluzny AD (1994) Continuous quality improvement in health care. Aspen, Gaithersburg, MDGoogle Scholar
  19. Meijer WM, de Smit DJ, Jurgens RA, de Jong-van den Berg LTW (2004) Pharmacists’ role in improving awareness about folic acid: a pilot study on the process of introducing an intervention in pharmacy practice. Int J Pharm Pract 12:29–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. O’Brien R (1998) An overview of the methodological approach of research. http://web.net/~robrien/papers/xx%20ar%20final.htm. Viewed 21 August 2014
  21. Reason P, Bradbury H (2001) Introduction: inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In: Reason P, Bradbury H (eds) Handbook of action research. Sage Publications, London, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  22. Roberts AS, Benrimoj SI, Chen TF, Williams KA, Aslani P (2006) Implementing cognitive services in community pharmacy: a review of facilitators used in practice change. Int J Pharm Pract 14:163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rudolph AE et al (2010) A community based approach to linking injection drug users with needed services through pharmacies: an evaluation of a pilot intervention in New York City. Aids Educ Prev 22(3):238–251CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Sørensen EW (1986) The pharmacy organisation under change. Paper. 4th Social Pharmacy Workshop, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  25. Sørensen EW (1988) Experiments in changing the pharmacy. Paper. 5th Social Pharmacy Workshop, PragueGoogle Scholar
  26. Sørensen EW (1993) Conducting social action research. Presentation, 10th November. Department of Social and Behavioural Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin-MadisonGoogle Scholar
  27. Sørensen EW, Haugbølle LS (2008) Using an action research process in pharmacy practice research—a cooperative project between university and internship pharmacies. Res Social Adm Pharm 4:384–401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Sørensen EW, Mak V (2011) Action research as an implementation strategy in pharmacy practice. Workshop presentation, Nordic Social Pharmacy Workshop, Reykjavik, JuneGoogle Scholar
  29. Sørensen EW, Winther L (1996) Conducting pharmacy practice research, part 1: research consultancy and action research. Paper. 9th Social Pharmacy Workshop, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  30. Sørensen EW, Haugbølle LS, Herborg H, Tomsen DV (2005) Improving situated learning in pharmacy internship. Pharm Educ 5:223–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sørensen EW et al (2009) Implementation of medication review using an action research method. Abstract and presentation. Nordic Social Pharmacy Conference, OsloGoogle Scholar
  32. Sørensen EW et al (2011) Implementation of a home medication review (HMR) collaboration model for pharmacies and pharmacy students—using action research. Abstract, poster and workshop. Nordic Social Pharmacy Conference, ReykjavikGoogle Scholar
  33. Tanna KN, Pitkin J, Anderson C (2005) Development of the specialist menopause pharmacist (SMP) role within a research frame work. Pharm World Sci 27:61–7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Tapp H et al (2014) Adapting community based participatory research (CBPR) methods to the implementation of an asthma shared decision making intervention in ambulatory practices. J Asthma 51(4):380–90CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Buul LW et al (2014) Participatory action research in anti-microbial stewardship: a novel approach to improving antimicrobial proscribing in hospitals and long-term care facilities. J Antimicrob Chemother. doi: 10.1093/jac/dku068 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Waterman H, Tillen D, Dickson R, De Koning K (2001) Action research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment. Health Tech Assess 5Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pharmacy, Section for Social and Clinical PharmacyCopenhagen UniversityCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations