Dataset Information

What does it take to change practice? Perspectives of pharmacists in Ontario.

ABSTRACT: This is a time of rapid change in the profession of pharmacy. Anecdotally, there are concerns that the pace, extent and rate of practice evolution are lagging. There is little evidence documenting the influencers and mechanisms that drive practice changes forward in pharmacy in Canada.An exploratory qualitative method was selected, using both one-on-one interviews with self-categorized typical pharmacists and larger focus groups to provide context and confirmation of themes generated through interviews. Data were analyzed and coded using a constant-comparative iterative method, in order to generate themes related to the factors influencing pharmacists to actually change their practice.A total of 46 pharmacists meeting inclusion criteria participated in this study in focus groups, interviews or both. Nine themes were identified: 1) permission, 2) process pointers, 3) practice/rehearsal, 4) positive reinforcement, 5) personalized attention, 6) peer referencing, 7) physician acceptance, 8) patients' expectations and 9) professional identity supportive of a truly clinical role. One theme that did not emerge was payment, or remuneration, as a specific or isolated motivational factor for change.The complexity of practice change in pharmacy and the multiple factors highlighted in this study point to a more deliberate and concerted effort being needed by diverse pharmacy organizations (educators, regulators, employers, professional associations, etc.) to support pharmacists through the change management process.The "9 Ps of practice change" identified through this study can provide pharmacists with guidance in terms of how to better support evolution of the profession in a more time-efficient and effective manner.

SUBMITTER: Gregory PAM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5755819 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jan-Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What does it take to change practice? Perspectives of pharmacists in Ontario.

Gregory Paul A M PAM Teixeira Beatriz B Austin Zubin Z

Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC 20171201 1

<h4>Background</h4>This is a time of rapid change in the profession of pharmacy. Anecdotally, there are concerns that the pace, extent and rate of practice evolution are lagging. There is little evidence documenting the influencers and mechanisms that drive practice changes forward in pharmacy in Canada.<h4>Methods</h4>An exploratory qualitative method was selected, using both one-on-one interviews with self-categorized typical pharmacists and larger focus groups to provide context and confirmat ...[more]

PMID: 29317936

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnder Ontario's Public Hospitals Act, the scope of professional practice of hospital pharmacists is approved by each hospital's medical advisory committee. Some Ontario hospitals have adopted policies or medical directives related to prescription modification, allowing pharmacists to broadly adapt, discontinue, hold, or renew prescriptions as part of their clinical scope of practice.ObjectivesThe primary objective of this study was to describe Ontario hospital pharmacists' perception of their readiness to independently modify prescriptions. The secondary objectives of this study were to gather opinions on the perceived benefits, drawbacks, facilitators, and barriers to prescription modification by pharmacists and to determine how various factors affect perceived readiness.MethodsA confidential web-based survey with Likert-type quantitative questions and qualitative open-ended questions was distributed to 936 hospital pharmacists in Ontario between May and July 2019. Mean scores were calculated for the following constructs affecting prescription modification: self-efficacy, support from the practice environment, and support from interprofessional relationships. Independent t tests were conducted to compare responses between subgroups of interest. The answers to open-ended questions were analyzed thematically.ResultsThe survey had a 29% response rate (n = 271). The mean self-efficacy score was 5.2 out of 7 (standard deviation [SD] 1.0, Cronbach α = 0.88), equivalent to "quite sure". The mean score for support from the practice environment was 3.3 out of 5 (SD 0.4, Cronbach α = 0.75), equivalent to "not a factor". The mean score for support from interprofessional relationships was 4.2 out of 5 (SD 0.1, Cronbach α = 0.80), equivalent to "weak support". Improved efficiency of care, timelier interventions to improve medication safety and efficacy, and improved interprofessional collaboration were cited as benefits of prescription modification by pharmacists. Potential for inappropriate decision-making and miscommunication were cited as concerns. Respondents in hospitals who were already performing prescription modification reported higher self-efficacy to modify prescriptions in clinical areas of both familiarity and unfamiliarity and greater support from prescribers.ConclusionsA large proportion of respondents to a survey of Ontario hospital pharmacists expressed an encouraging level of readiness to independently modify prescriptions. Responses to open-ended questions in this study provided valuable insights to inform widespread adoption of this practice change.

Project description:BackgroundPhysical assessment in pharmacy practice is not a new concept, yet the idea is still unfamiliar to many people. Canadian pharmacy graduates are expected to be trained in physical examination as it relates to drug therapy. However, standard delivery of course content in this area has not been clearly established, and previous publications have reported low uptake of this practice despite formal training. To aid the future development of a physical assessment course for pharmacists that is relevant to practice and will contribute to patient care, it is important to gather insight from practising pharmacists, health care providers and the public.ObjectiveTo determine the type of physical assessment skills that would be of value to pharmacy practice and the benefits and barriers of these skills in practice from the perspectives of pharmacists, health care providers and the public.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional online survey of pharmacists, nonpharmacist health care providers and the public. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to describe data.ResultsA total of 348 respondents (98 pharmacists, 154 nonpharmacist health care providers, 96 public) completed the survey. Most (64%) nonpharmacist providers were physiotherapists or occupational therapists (only 6.5% physicians). Most respondents felt that performing basic vital signs was relevant to pharmacy practice (79% pharmacists, 69% other providers, 79% public) and felt confident and comfortable about pharmacists using these skills. Palpation, percussion and auscultation were rated less favourably (<50% for most respondents). Nonpharmacist providers tended to be less favourable than pharmacist and public respondents. Seven themes related to benefits and 13 themes related to disadvantages of pharmacists performing physical assessment were identified.ConclusionThese findings provide insight into opinions about the value of pharmacists performing physical assessments. Consensus recommendations on performance expectations to improve recognition of pharmacists in this area is needed in the future. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2021;154:xx-xx.

Project description:BackgroundThe inclusion of pharmacists into general practices in Australia has expanded in recent years. This systematic review aimed to synthesise the literature of qualitative and quantitative studies, and identify the knowledge gaps, related to pharmacists working in general practice in Australia.MethodsThis systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from the inception of databases to January 2021. The search was focused on studies investigating general practice pharmacists in Australia. The quality of each study was appraised using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool criteria. The narrative synthesis approach was utilised to describe data due to the heterogeneity among study designs and measures.ResultsTwenty-five studies were included in this review. General practice pharmacists engaged in various non-dispensing patient care services, with medication management reviews being the primary activity reported. General practice pharmacists' characteristics and an environment with a willingness of collaboration were the notable influencing factors for successfully including pharmacists in general practices. Factors that posed a challenge to the adoption of general practice pharmacists were lack of funding and other resources, poorly defined roles, and absence of mentoring/training.ConclusionThis review has summarised the characteristics, activities, benefits, barriers, and facilitators of including pharmacists in general practices in Australia. General practice pharmacists are well accepted by stakeholders, and they can engage in a range of patient-centred activities to benefit patients. There is a need for more robust research to explore the patient and economic outcomes related to clinical activities that a pharmacist can perform in general practice, as a foundation to developing an appropriate and sustainable funding model. The findings of this review will be beneficial for pharmacists, researchers, policymakers, and readers who wish to implement the role of general practice pharmacists in the future.

Project description:(1) Background: My Health Record (MHR) is a relatively new nationwide Australian digital health record system accessible by patients and a range of healthcare professionals. Pharmacists will be key contributors and users of the MHR system, yet little is known about the perceived barriers and benefits of use. (2) Objective: To explore pharmacists' perspectives related to potential benefits and barriers associated with use of MHR. (3) Methods: An online survey was developed and face-validated. The survey was advertised to Australian pharmacists on pharmacy professional bodies' websites. This was a cross-sectional study using an anonymous questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the distribution of the data. Chi-square, Kendall's tau coefficient (tau-c) and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to examine the relationships where appropriate. (4) Results: A total of 63 pharmacists completed the survey. The majority of respondents worked in a metropolitan area (74%), and the most common workplace setting was community pharmacy (65%). Perceived benefits identified by responders include that the use of MHR would help with continuity of care (90%), and that it would improve the safety (71%) and quality (75%) of care they provided. Importantly, more than half of pharmacists surveyed agreed that MHR could reduce medication errors during dispensing (57%) and could improve professional relationships with patients (57%) and general practitioners (59%). Potential barriers identified by pharmacists included patients' concerns about privacy (81%), pharmacists' own concern about privacy (46%), lack of training, access to and confidence in using the system. Sixty six percent of respondents had concerns about the accuracy of information contained within MHR, particularly among hospital and general practice pharmacists (p = 0.016) and almost half (44%) had concerns about the security of information in the system, mainly pharmacists working at general practice and providing medication review services (p = 0.007). Overall satisfaction with MHR varied, with 48% satisfied, 33% neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, and 19% dissatisfied, with a higher satisfaction rate among younger pharmacists (p = 0.032). (5) Conclusions: Pharmacists considered that the MHR offered key potential benefits, notably improving the safety and quality of care provided. To optimize the use of MHR, there is a need to improve privacy and data security measures, and to ensure adequate provision of user support and education surrounding the ability to integrate use of MHR with existing workflows and software.

Dataset Information

What does it take to change practice? Perspectives of pharmacists in Ontario.

Publications

What does it take to change practice? Perspectives of pharmacists in Ontario.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets