Pharmaceutical Public Health: A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring Pharmacy Professionals' Advanced Roles in Public Health, Including the Barriers and Enablers.

IF 2 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Pharmacy Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.3390/pharmacy13020037
Diane Ashiru-Oredope, Roeann Osman, Adeola H Ayeni, Eleanor J Harvey, Maria Nasim, Emma Wright, Christina Narh, Uju Okereke, Tasmin Harrison, Christopher Garland, Cecilia Pyper, Andrew Evans, Marion Bennie
{"title":"Pharmaceutical Public Health: A Mixed-Methods Study Exploring Pharmacy Professionals' Advanced Roles in Public Health, Including the Barriers and Enablers.","authors":"Diane Ashiru-Oredope, Roeann Osman, Adeola H Ayeni, Eleanor J Harvey, Maria Nasim, Emma Wright, Christina Narh, Uju Okereke, Tasmin Harrison, Christopher Garland, Cecilia Pyper, Andrew Evans, Marion Bennie","doi":"10.3390/pharmacy13020037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the UK and globally, pharmacy professionals (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) contribute to the delivery of local and national public or population health interventions. The existing literature on pharmaceutical public health predominantly focuses on micro-level activities, primarily describing community pharmacies delivering public health interventions to individuals. There is little-known evidence on pharmacy professionals' involvement in delivering public health interventions at meso- (e.g., organisational) and macro (national/policy) levels, nor to what extent pharmacy professionals have specialist/advanced roles within public health practice. This study specifically explored pharmacy professionals' specialist/advanced roles within public health as well as the opportunities and barriers to career development. The analyses of this mixed-methods study makes a series of important recommendations for future action.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included two independent cross-sectional electronic surveys for pharmacy professionals and public health professionals, a call for evidence, and two workshops to develop recommendations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Pharmacy professionals (n = 128) and public health professionals (n = 54) across the UK participated in the surveys. Most of the Pharmacy Professionals respondents were female (70%), pharmacists (85%), working in primary (33%) or secondary (25%) care settings, mainly based in England (75%), and most (63%) lacked formal public health qualifications although they were involved in a diverse range of public health interventions. The public health professionals were mostly females (67%), practicing in England (58%). Both professional groups identified opportunities and barriers to pharmacy professionals' involvement in public health. Almost half of the public health professionals respondents (44%) stated that they had a pharmacy professional working as part of their current public health teams. Eighty-seven percent of public health professional respondents (45/52) agreed that having pharmacists or pharmacy technicians specialising in public health would be beneficial or very beneficial. Most of the documents, reports, and case histories provided through the call for evidence were unpublished. The workshops generated 94 recommendation statements, highlighting collaboration and the need to acknowledge pharmacy professionals' contributions to public health.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The recommendations for strategic action at meso- and macro-levels included three main themes: adopting a national strategic approach to pharmaceutical public health, including improving commissioning; formalising pharmaceutical public health workforce development; and promoting further evidence-based pharmaceutical public health research and development.</p>","PeriodicalId":30544,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacy","volume":"13 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11932277/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy13020037","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

Background: In the UK and globally, pharmacy professionals (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) contribute to the delivery of local and national public or population health interventions. The existing literature on pharmaceutical public health predominantly focuses on micro-level activities, primarily describing community pharmacies delivering public health interventions to individuals. There is little-known evidence on pharmacy professionals' involvement in delivering public health interventions at meso- (e.g., organisational) and macro (national/policy) levels, nor to what extent pharmacy professionals have specialist/advanced roles within public health practice. This study specifically explored pharmacy professionals' specialist/advanced roles within public health as well as the opportunities and barriers to career development. The analyses of this mixed-methods study makes a series of important recommendations for future action.

Methods: This study included two independent cross-sectional electronic surveys for pharmacy professionals and public health professionals, a call for evidence, and two workshops to develop recommendations.

Results: Pharmacy professionals (n = 128) and public health professionals (n = 54) across the UK participated in the surveys. Most of the Pharmacy Professionals respondents were female (70%), pharmacists (85%), working in primary (33%) or secondary (25%) care settings, mainly based in England (75%), and most (63%) lacked formal public health qualifications although they were involved in a diverse range of public health interventions. The public health professionals were mostly females (67%), practicing in England (58%). Both professional groups identified opportunities and barriers to pharmacy professionals' involvement in public health. Almost half of the public health professionals respondents (44%) stated that they had a pharmacy professional working as part of their current public health teams. Eighty-seven percent of public health professional respondents (45/52) agreed that having pharmacists or pharmacy technicians specialising in public health would be beneficial or very beneficial. Most of the documents, reports, and case histories provided through the call for evidence were unpublished. The workshops generated 94 recommendation statements, highlighting collaboration and the need to acknowledge pharmacy professionals' contributions to public health.

Conclusion: The recommendations for strategic action at meso- and macro-levels included three main themes: adopting a national strategic approach to pharmaceutical public health, including improving commissioning; formalising pharmaceutical public health workforce development; and promoting further evidence-based pharmaceutical public health research and development.

药学公共卫生:一项探索药学专业人员在公共卫生中的高级角色的混合方法研究,包括障碍和促进因素。
背景:在英国和全球范围内,药学专业人员(药剂师和药学技术人员)有助于提供地方和国家公共或人口健康干预措施。现有关于药物公共卫生的文献主要集中在微观层面的活动,主要描述社区药房向个人提供公共卫生干预措施。很少有证据表明药学专业人员在中观(例如组织)和宏观(国家/政策)层面参与提供公共卫生干预措施,也没有证据表明药学专业人员在多大程度上在公共卫生实践中具有专业/高级作用。本研究特别探讨了药学专业人员在公共卫生中的专业/高级角色以及职业发展的机会和障碍。对这项混合方法研究的分析为今后的行动提出了一系列重要建议。方法:本研究包括两次针对药学专业人员和公共卫生专业人员的独立横断面电子调查,一次证据征集,以及两次制定建议的研讨会。结果:全英国的药学专业人员(n = 128)和公共卫生专业人员(n = 54)参与了调查。大多数药学专业人员是女性(70%),药剂师(85%),在初级(33%)或二级(25%)护理机构工作,主要在英格兰(75%),大多数(63%)缺乏正式的公共卫生资格,尽管他们参与了各种各样的公共卫生干预措施。公共卫生专业人员大多数是女性(67%),在英格兰执业(58%)。两个专业团体都确定了药学专业人员参与公共卫生的机会和障碍。答复者中几乎一半的公共卫生专业人员(44%)表示,他们目前的公共卫生团队中有一名药学专业人员。87%的公共卫生专业答复者(45/52)同意,拥有专门从事公共卫生工作的药剂师或药学技术人员将是有益或非常有益的。通过证据征集提供的大多数文件、报告和病例历史都未发表。讲习班产生了94项建议声明,强调了协作和承认药学专业人员对公共卫生的贡献的必要性。结论:关于在中观和宏观两级采取战略行动的建议包括三个主题:对药品公共卫生采取国家战略方针,包括改进委托;使药学公共卫生人力发展正规化;并进一步推动循证药物公共卫生研究与开发。
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
Pharmacy
Pharmacy PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
自引率
9.10%
发文量
141
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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