RPS Conference 2010, Abstracts 2010 - Royal Pharmaceutical Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

agree' that prescribing increased continuity of care for patients compared to 74.3% [26/35] of those who had never prescribed (P = 0.02). Conclusions Findings to date have been positive in terms of patient and pharmacist outcomes. There were perceived benefits in terms of patient care; this has been reported elsewhere 2, 3 . Prescribing pharmacists indicated that prescribing elevated their status within the healthcare team and increased the job satisfaction and independence of the prescribing pharmacist as has also been noted 2,3 . These results will inform further phases of this research that will focus on current prescribers, doctors, patients and key stakeholders. References . 1. Offredy, M. (2009) Development of non-medical prescribing – Historical background and competency framework for successful prescribing. In Sodha, M. and Dhillon, S. (2009) Nonmedical prescribing. <strong>Pharmaceutical</strong> Press: London. 2.Lloyd, F and Hughes, C (2007) Pharmacists’ and mentors’ views on the introduction of pharmacist supplementary prescribing: a qualitative evaluation of views and context. Int Journ Pharm Pract. 15:31-37. 3. George, J., McCaig., Bond, C et al (2006) Supplementary prescribing: Early experiences of pharmacists in Great Britain. Ann Pharmacother. 40: 1843-1850.
94 Pharmacy prescribing in XXXX-a qualitative assessment Laura McCann 1 , Carmel Hughes 1 , Fran Lloyd 2 , Sharon Haughey 1 , Carole Parsons 1 , Grainne Crealey 3 , Gerry Gormley 4 1 School of Pharmacy, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom, 2 Northern Ireland Centre for Pharmacy Learning and Development, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom, 3 Clinical Research Support Centre, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, United Kingdom, 4 Department of General Practice and Primary Care, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Belfast, United Kingdom Focal Points • This study sought to provide an in depth understanding of pharmacist prescribing via semi-structured interviews with pharmacist prescribers in XXXX. • Improved patient care and elevated status within the health care team were reported • Further work is needed on the impact of pharmacist prescribing on patient outcomes. Introduction The drive for non-medical prescribing has progressed quickly since the late 1990’s and currently involves a range of health care professionals including pharmacists 1 . A number of early findings on this form of practice have been reported, such as increased job satisfaction, greater recognition and time-saving by prescribers, but this was tempered by financial and organisational problems 2 . As part of a commissioned research project, this qualitative study (Phase 2 of a 3 phase study) focused on qualified pharmacist prescribers. The aim of this study was to provide an in depth understanding of pharmacist prescribing from the perspective of pharmacist prescribers. Method Fifty three pharmacists from a potential of 76 pharmacist prescribers (who completed a questionnaire in an earlier phase) agreed to participate in phase 2. A maximum variation sample of pharmacists (11 from 53; working in range of practice settings and clinical areas) were randomly selected to participate in semi-structured interviews (1 previous, 6 current, 4 never]. All 11 pharmacists were invited to participate in one-to-one semi-structured interviews (ethical approval granted). Interviews took place at participants’ work sites (January <strong>2010</strong>), were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, read independently by the authors and analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Five pharmacist interviews have been completed and transcribed to date. The remaining 6 interviews have taken place and transcription is underway. Pharmacist participants (2 female, 3 male) varied in terms of their prescribing activities with 2 currently prescribing (CP) and 3 who had never prescribed (NP). Themes which emerged were perceived improved patient care, and a more positive professional experience. A number of barriers (financial and workload) to implementation of pharmacist prescribing were also reported by those who had never prescribed. Table 1 provides supporting quotes which illustrate these themes:
Page 1 and 2:
1 Cost effectiveness of community p
Page 3 and 4:
2 The Diabetes Pilot Program: Barri
Page 5 and 6:
3 The PINCER trial: a cluster rando
Page 7 and 8:
4 How pharmacists working on the PI
Page 9 and 10:
5 A systematic review of weight man
Page 11 and 12:
6 An exploration of the potential i
Page 13 and 14:
7 An Exploration of Nursing Home Ma
Page 15 and 16:
8 Unintended discrepancies between
Page 17 and 18:
9 Unlicensed Medicines: Risk and Re
Page 19 and 20:
10 Audit of Discharge Summaries in
Page 21 and 22:
11 Over-the-counter simvastatin: co
Page 23 and 24:
12 A qualitative study of disadvant
Page 25 and 26:
13 Pharmacist prescribing in North
Page 27 and 28:
14 Pharmacist prescribing in primar
Page 29 and 30:
15 Training undergraduate pharmacy
Page 31 and 32:
16 ‘You’re an agent unto yourse
Page 33 and 34:
17 Information for young people wit
Page 35 and 36:
18 The Role of the Pharmacist and E
Page 37 and 38:
19 Exploring patient opinions of MU
Page 39 and 40:
20 Why do patients accept or declin
Page 41 and 42:
21 Further investigations on GP pre
Page 43 and 44:
22 The HAPPY trial: a randomised co
Page 45 and 46:
23 The effects of numeracy on the p
Page 47 and 48:
24 Translation and evaluation of
Page 49 and 50:
25 Influence of relationships, trus
Page 51 and 52:
26 Title: Pharmacists’ well being
Page 53 and 54:
27 What do newly qualified pharmaci
Page 55 and 56:
28 Does learning the “pure” sci
Page 57 and 58:
29 Defining and identifying perform
Page 59 and 60:
30 Engendering and Appraising ‘Pr
Page 61 and 62:
31 Inappropriate prescribing of Opi
Page 63 and 64:
32 Developing a five-year curriculu
Page 65 and 66:
33 An Investigation of the incidenc
Page 67 and 68:
34 Analysing medicine wastage in th
Page 69 and 70:
35 A Clinical Audit on the Use of A
Page 71 and 72:
36 A Clinical Audit on Reporting an
Page 73 and 74:
37 Assessment of hypertension care
Page 75 and 76:
38 Community pharmacy EHC services:
Page 77 and 78:
39 The Impact of the Lloyds Pharmac
Page 79 and 80:
40 Medication and handover incident
Page 81 and 82:
41 The time-scale for delivery of p
Page 83 and 84:
42 Medication access in primary car
Page 85 and 86:
43 A solution to improving uptake o
Page 87 and 88:
44 Medicines Information to Support
Page 89 and 90:
45 Are pharmacist public health pra
Page 91 and 92:
46 Anticoagulation for haemofiltrat
Page 93 and 94:
47 Med Wreck: An Audit of Communica
Page 95 and 96:
48 Pandemic flu preparedness: Plann
Page 97 and 98:
49 Young people's views about chlam
Page 99 and 100:
50 Psychotropic use in elderly pati
Page 101 and 102:
51 Using simulation of community ph
Page 103 and 104:
52 ‘Pharmacists in Schools’: De
Page 105 and 106:
53 What do Pharmacists in Surrey wa
Page 107 and 108:
54 Has the new audit module in the
Page 109 and 110:
55 Introduction of a Nursing Home B
Page 111 and 112:
56 An audit of Benzodiazepine presc
Page 113 and 114:
57 Improving patient safety through
Page 115 and 116:
58 Video clips enhance student lear
Page 117 and 118:
59 Do preregistration trainee pharm
Page 119 and 120:
60 An investigation of the views of
Page 121 and 122:
61 Ensuring accuracy in routinely c
Page 123 and 124:
62 Deprivation status and utilizati
Page 125 and 126:
63 Exploring Reasons, Factors and A
Page 127 and 128:
64 I’m off to the gym: Exploring
Page 129 and 130:
65 Is there alignment between the v
Page 131 and 132:
66 The views of out-patients with c
Page 133 and 134:
67 Patient Experiences of Living wi
Page 135 and 136: 68 Clinical management and cost of
Page 137 and 138: 69 Medicines Use Reviews - how have
Page 139 and 140: 70 How are pharmacists, registered
Page 141 and 142: 71 Barriers facing hypertensive pat
Page 143 and 144: 72 Developing an RCT of general pra
Page 145 and 146: 73 User and Staff Perspectives of C
Page 147 and 148: 74 Impact of pandemic influenza A/H
Page 149 and 150: 75 How do patients with osteoporosi
Page 151 and 152: 76 Integrating tuberculosis and dia
Page 153 and 154: 77 Improving outcomes and quality o
Page 155 and 156: 78 The uncertain future: a pilot st
Page 157 and 158: 79 Linkage of routinely collected N
Page 159 and 160: 80 Impact of Formative Assessment o
Page 161 and 162: 81 The prevalence of pharmacists’
Page 163 and 164: 82 A comparative study of prescribi
Page 165 and 166: 83 Evaluation of patient informatio
Page 167 and 168: 84 Patient medication adherence: a
Page 169 and 170: 85 Fitness to practise: pharmacists
Page 171 and 172: 86 Measurement of empathy levels in
Page 173 and 174: 87 Benzyl Alcohol Exposure from Hep
Page 175 and 176: 88 Neonatal gentamicin infusions- W
Page 177 and 178: 89 Unlicensed and off-label use of
Page 179 and 180: 90 Unlicensed and off-label prescri
Page 181 and 182: 91 Exploring community pharmacists
Page 183 and 184: 92 Investigation into Rapid Microbi
Page 185: 93 Pharmacy prescribing in XXXX-a q
Page 189 and 190: 95 MEDICINE RELATED PROBLEMS IN SOU
Page 191 and 192: 96 Stability of pharmaceutical prod
Page 193 and 194: 97 The experiences of Malaysian pha
Page 195 and 196: 98 Medication management in older p
Page 197 and 198: 99 Adherence with calcium and vitam
Page 199 and 200: 100 Appraisal systems within commun
Page 201 and 202: 101 The clinical impact of a fractu
Page 203 and 204: 102 An audit of primary care prescr
Page 205 and 206: 103 Views of the public on over-the
show all

RPS Conference 2010, Abstracts 2010 - Royal Pharmaceutical Society

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?