A qualitative exploration of stakeholder perspectives of independent prescribing by newly qualified pharmacists: a theoretical domains interview study.

IF 1.5 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Megan Fawkes, Rachel Mullen, Suzanne Cutler
{"title":"A qualitative exploration of stakeholder perspectives of independent prescribing by newly qualified pharmacists: a theoretical domains interview study.","authors":"Megan Fawkes, Rachel Mullen, Suzanne Cutler","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riae056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To explore the perspectives of stakeholders on the General Pharmaceutical Council's revised Standards for the Initial Education and Training of Pharmacists that enable pharmacists to prescribe at the point of registration, from 2026.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to develop schedules for structured interviews that were conducted with various stakeholders and recorded via Microsoft Teams. Recordings were transcribed verbatim, checked for accuracy, and then analysed using the Framework approach, facilitated by NVIVO® software.</p><p><strong>Key findings: </strong>In total, 43 participants (patients, community, hospital and primary care pharmacists, GPs, and nurses) were interviewed. Eleven out of the fourteen TDF domains were identified, the most frequently cited being 'beliefs about consequences', e.g. reducing pressure on the healthcare service, and concerns that non-prescribing pharmacists will be disadvantaged by the change. The domain 'environmental context and resources' was also cited where increasing placement opportunities to develop the required clinical skills were key enablers to implementation, while a lack of confidence, and lack of space, equipment and commercial pressures were considered barriers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, stakeholders in the study were supportive of pharmacists registering as independent prescribers upon qualification, however, there were concerns raised regarding their readiness, as well as preparedness of employers for this change. These concerns must be addressed to reassure stakeholders and to ensure that universities and employers adequately prepare pharmacists to prescribe at the point of registration and provide them with support and the necessary infrastructure to do so safely.</p>","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","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/riae056","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: To explore the perspectives of stakeholders on the General Pharmaceutical Council's revised Standards for the Initial Education and Training of Pharmacists that enable pharmacists to prescribe at the point of registration, from 2026.

Methods: This qualitative study used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to develop schedules for structured interviews that were conducted with various stakeholders and recorded via Microsoft Teams. Recordings were transcribed verbatim, checked for accuracy, and then analysed using the Framework approach, facilitated by NVIVO® software.

Key findings: In total, 43 participants (patients, community, hospital and primary care pharmacists, GPs, and nurses) were interviewed. Eleven out of the fourteen TDF domains were identified, the most frequently cited being 'beliefs about consequences', e.g. reducing pressure on the healthcare service, and concerns that non-prescribing pharmacists will be disadvantaged by the change. The domain 'environmental context and resources' was also cited where increasing placement opportunities to develop the required clinical skills were key enablers to implementation, while a lack of confidence, and lack of space, equipment and commercial pressures were considered barriers.

Conclusions: Overall, stakeholders in the study were supportive of pharmacists registering as independent prescribers upon qualification, however, there were concerns raised regarding their readiness, as well as preparedness of employers for this change. These concerns must be addressed to reassure stakeholders and to ensure that universities and employers adequately prepare pharmacists to prescribe at the point of registration and provide them with support and the necessary infrastructure to do so safely.

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