Recognizing the opportunity to directly de-label no-risk penicillin allergies in community pharmacy: a mystery shopper experience.

IF 1.5 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Angelina Lim, Sharmila Khumra, Annika Dalley, Grace Bubb, Jacqueline Chien, David C M Kong
{"title":"Recognizing the opportunity to directly de-label no-risk penicillin allergies in community pharmacy: a mystery shopper experience.","authors":"Angelina Lim, Sharmila Khumra, Annika Dalley, Grace Bubb, Jacqueline Chien, David C M Kong","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riae020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Incorrect labelling of a penicillin allergy can lead to unnecessary use of broad-spectrum, less effective, more harmful, or more costly antibiotics. Community pharmacists are well positioned to educate the public on penicillin allergies, prevent incorrect labelling persisting, and optimize prescribing of antibiotics. This study investigated community pharmacists' capacity to recognize an opportunity to directly de-label a no-risk penicillin allergy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sequential explanatory mixed methods design using mystery shopping (quantitative) and postvisit reflections (qualitative). Mystery shoppers simulated a case of a previously dispensed prescription (involving nonimmune mediated intolerance 'thrush' as the reported allergy) that provided the opportunity for pharmacists to educate on incorrect penicillin allergy. The main outcomes were proportion of community pharmacists who ascertained the nature of the penicillin reaction, provided education on incorrect penicillin allergy labels and its consequences. Knowledge and practices regarding penicillin allergy were collected.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>Across two major states in Australia, 265 community pharmacists participated. Only 44.5% (118/265) of pharmacists asked about the nature of the reaction; of those, 91.52% (108/118) indicated that 'thrush' is not an allergic reaction. No pharmacists took the opportunity to educate on how an incorrect allergy label can impact antibiotic prescribing. Postvisit reflection data revealed five probable explanations for the observations viz. outdated knowledge, lack of knowledge, prioritizing management of adverse drug reaction (thrush), variations in duty of care and assumption of true allergy without an assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings underscore a concerning knowledge and practice gap among community pharmacists regarding penicillin allergy assessment which warrants more support and education in the community pharmacy sector.</p>","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":"267-273"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riae020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Incorrect labelling of a penicillin allergy can lead to unnecessary use of broad-spectrum, less effective, more harmful, or more costly antibiotics. Community pharmacists are well positioned to educate the public on penicillin allergies, prevent incorrect labelling persisting, and optimize prescribing of antibiotics. This study investigated community pharmacists' capacity to recognize an opportunity to directly de-label a no-risk penicillin allergy.

Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed methods design using mystery shopping (quantitative) and postvisit reflections (qualitative). Mystery shoppers simulated a case of a previously dispensed prescription (involving nonimmune mediated intolerance 'thrush' as the reported allergy) that provided the opportunity for pharmacists to educate on incorrect penicillin allergy. The main outcomes were proportion of community pharmacists who ascertained the nature of the penicillin reaction, provided education on incorrect penicillin allergy labels and its consequences. Knowledge and practices regarding penicillin allergy were collected.

Key findings: Across two major states in Australia, 265 community pharmacists participated. Only 44.5% (118/265) of pharmacists asked about the nature of the reaction; of those, 91.52% (108/118) indicated that 'thrush' is not an allergic reaction. No pharmacists took the opportunity to educate on how an incorrect allergy label can impact antibiotic prescribing. Postvisit reflection data revealed five probable explanations for the observations viz. outdated knowledge, lack of knowledge, prioritizing management of adverse drug reaction (thrush), variations in duty of care and assumption of true allergy without an assessment.

Conclusion: Our findings underscore a concerning knowledge and practice gap among community pharmacists regarding penicillin allergy assessment which warrants more support and education in the community pharmacy sector.

认识到社区药房直接取消无风险青霉素过敏标签的机会:神秘顾客的经验。
目的:青霉素过敏的错误标签会导致不必要地使用广谱、低效、有害或昂贵的抗生素。社区药剂师完全有能力向公众宣传青霉素过敏的相关知识,防止错误标签的持续存在,并优化抗生素处方。本研究调查了社区药剂师识别直接取消无风险青霉素过敏标签的能力:方法:采用神秘购物(定量)和访问后反思(定性)的顺序解释混合方法设计。神秘顾客模拟了一个以前开出的处方(涉及非免疫介导的不耐受 "鹅口疮 "过敏)的案例,为药剂师提供了对不正确的青霉素过敏进行教育的机会。主要结果是社区药剂师中确定青霉素反应性质、提供有关错误青霉素过敏标签及其后果的教育的比例。还收集了有关青霉素过敏的知识和做法:澳大利亚两个主要州的 265 名社区药剂师参加了调查。只有 44.5%(118/265)的药剂师询问了反应的性质;其中 91.52%(108/118)的药剂师表示 "鹅口疮 "不是过敏反应。没有药剂师借此机会向患者讲解错误的过敏标签会如何影响抗生素处方。访问后的反思数据揭示了观察结果的五种可能解释,即:知识过时、缺乏知识、优先处理药物不良反应(鹅口疮)、护理责任的差异以及未经评估即假定为真正的过敏:我们的研究结果表明,社区药剂师在青霉素过敏评估方面存在知识和实践上的差距,需要社区药学部门提供更多支持和教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice (IJPP) is a Medline-indexed, peer reviewed, international journal. It is one of the leading journals publishing health services research in the context of pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, medicines and medicines management. Regular sections in the journal include, editorials, literature reviews, original research, personal opinion and short communications. Topics covered include: medicines utilisation, medicine management, medicines distribution, supply and administration, pharmaceutical services, professional and patient/lay perspectives, public health (including, e.g. health promotion, needs assessment, health protection) evidence based practice, pharmacy education. Methods include both evaluative and exploratory work including, randomised controlled trials, surveys, epidemiological approaches, case studies, observational studies, and qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups. Application of methods drawn from other disciplines e.g. psychology, health economics, morbidity are especially welcome as are developments of new methodologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信