Pharmacists' views on barriers and enablers to the implementation of advanced pharmacist prescribing in Scotland: a qualitative study using normalisation process theory.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Mairi-Anne McLean, Paul Forsyth, Anne C Boyter
{"title":"Pharmacists' views on barriers and enablers to the implementation of advanced pharmacist prescribing in Scotland: a qualitative study using normalisation process theory.","authors":"Mairi-Anne McLean, Paul Forsyth, Anne C Boyter","doi":"10.1007/s11096-025-02021-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Healthcare systems need more professionals able to deliver autonomous holistic advanced care. Exploring pharmacists' views on the implementation of advanced pharmacist prescribing (i.e. prescribing autonomously in complex, uncertain, or higher-risk situations) will allow stakeholders to reflect on possible changes that may embed and sustain this work.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore pharmacists' views on barriers and enablers to the implementation of advanced pharmacist prescribing in Scotland.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Semi-structured one-to-one interviews were conducted with National Health Service employed pharmacists from across Scotland, recruited via professional networks using purposive sampling to ensure a range of professional backgrounds, geography and prescribing activity. Interviews were developed and analysed using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), a sociological framework for understanding how new practices become embedded in routine healthcare and analysed using a hybrid deductive/inductive thematic framework analysis approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen pharmacists from across Scotland participated in the study. Barriers and enablers to advanced pharmacist prescribing were identified in all NPT constructs (Coherence, Cognitive Participation, Collective Action, and Reflexive Monitoring). In responses relating to the Coherence construct, enablers included individual understanding of how advanced pharmacist prescribing differs from other advanced pharmacist tasks, as well as the role of an advanced pharmacist prescriber. Lack of shared understanding emerged as a barrier. Cognitive Participation identified barriers including lack of appropriate roles and training as well as a lack of infrastructure to support advanced pharmacist prescribing. In Collective Action, barriers included lack of confidence in consistent delivery of advanced pharmacist prescribing and resource constraints. Reflexive Monitoring revealed strong individual belief in advanced pharmacist prescribing, but barriers included a lack of multidisciplinary evaluation and a need for service reconfiguration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While individual pharmacists were found to be committed to advanced pharmacist prescribing, widespread implementation is hindered by a lack of shared understanding, inconsistent role structures, and limited strategic alignment. These findings offer valuable insight for those with an interest in embedding and sustaining advanced pharmacist prescribing.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-025-02021-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Healthcare systems need more professionals able to deliver autonomous holistic advanced care. Exploring pharmacists' views on the implementation of advanced pharmacist prescribing (i.e. prescribing autonomously in complex, uncertain, or higher-risk situations) will allow stakeholders to reflect on possible changes that may embed and sustain this work.

Aim: To explore pharmacists' views on barriers and enablers to the implementation of advanced pharmacist prescribing in Scotland.

Method: Semi-structured one-to-one interviews were conducted with National Health Service employed pharmacists from across Scotland, recruited via professional networks using purposive sampling to ensure a range of professional backgrounds, geography and prescribing activity. Interviews were developed and analysed using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), a sociological framework for understanding how new practices become embedded in routine healthcare and analysed using a hybrid deductive/inductive thematic framework analysis approach.

Results: Thirteen pharmacists from across Scotland participated in the study. Barriers and enablers to advanced pharmacist prescribing were identified in all NPT constructs (Coherence, Cognitive Participation, Collective Action, and Reflexive Monitoring). In responses relating to the Coherence construct, enablers included individual understanding of how advanced pharmacist prescribing differs from other advanced pharmacist tasks, as well as the role of an advanced pharmacist prescriber. Lack of shared understanding emerged as a barrier. Cognitive Participation identified barriers including lack of appropriate roles and training as well as a lack of infrastructure to support advanced pharmacist prescribing. In Collective Action, barriers included lack of confidence in consistent delivery of advanced pharmacist prescribing and resource constraints. Reflexive Monitoring revealed strong individual belief in advanced pharmacist prescribing, but barriers included a lack of multidisciplinary evaluation and a need for service reconfiguration.

Conclusion: While individual pharmacists were found to be committed to advanced pharmacist prescribing, widespread implementation is hindered by a lack of shared understanding, inconsistent role structures, and limited strategic alignment. These findings offer valuable insight for those with an interest in embedding and sustaining advanced pharmacist prescribing.

药剂师对苏格兰高级药剂师处方实施的障碍和推动因素的看法:一项使用正常化过程理论的定性研究。
医疗保健系统需要更多的专业人员能够提供自主的整体高级护理。探索药剂师对实施高级药剂师处方(即在复杂、不确定或高风险情况下自主开处方)的看法,将使利益相关者能够反思可能嵌入和维持这项工作的变化。目的:探讨苏格兰药师对实施高级药师处方的障碍和促进因素的看法。方法:对来自苏格兰各地的国家卫生服务雇佣药剂师进行了半结构化的一对一访谈,通过专业网络招募,采用有目的的抽样,以确保专业背景,地理和处方活动的范围。访谈是使用正常化过程理论(NPT)开发和分析的,这是一个社会学框架,用于理解新实践如何融入日常医疗保健,并使用混合演绎/归纳主题框架分析方法进行分析。结果:来自苏格兰各地的13名药剂师参与了这项研究。在所有NPT构建(连贯性、认知参与、集体行动和反射性监测)中,确定了高级药剂师开处方的障碍和推动因素。在与连贯性构建相关的响应中,促成因素包括个人对高级药剂师处方与其他高级药剂师任务的不同之处的理解,以及高级药剂师处方的角色。缺乏共同的理解成为一个障碍。认知参与发现的障碍包括缺乏适当的角色和培训,以及缺乏支持高级药剂师开处方的基础设施。在集体行动方面,障碍包括对持续提供高级药剂师处方和资源限制缺乏信心。反身性监测显示,个人对高级药剂师处方的信念很强,但障碍包括缺乏多学科评估和服务重构的需要。结论:虽然发现个别药剂师致力于高级药剂师处方,但由于缺乏共同的理解,不一致的角色结构和有限的战略一致性,广泛实施受到阻碍。这些发现为那些对嵌入和维持高级药剂师处方感兴趣的人提供了有价值的见解。
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
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信