探讨临床药剂师对支持二级医疗机构开展临床研究的看法及其认为的障碍和促进因素

IF 1.5 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Y. Jiao, J. Shenton
{"title":"探讨临床药剂师对支持二级医疗机构开展临床研究的看法及其认为的障碍和促进因素","authors":"Y. Jiao, J. Shenton","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riad074.032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The National Health Service (NHS) is confronted with significant challenges in facilitating clinical research delivery.1 Clinical pharmacists were instrumental in ensuring patient safety while conducting urgent public health studies, such as the RECOVERY trial, during the COVID-19 pandemic.2 Numerous studies have reported the positive impact of pharmacy workforce in supporting clinical research delivery3. However, it remains unclear whether pharmacists are willing to take on this extra responsibility. To explore the opinions of UK clinical pharmacists towards facilitating the delivery of clinical research in secondary care. Objectives include understanding the level of knowledge of clinical research among clinical pharmacists; assessing levels of interest among clinical pharmacists towards supporting clinical research delivery; identifying clinical pharmacists’ perceived barriers and facilitators to supporting clinical research delivery; and developing recommendations to facilitate pharmacists’ engagement in research delivery. This study employed a qualitative research approach and utilised convenience sampling based on the researcher’s professional network. Eight pharmacists from two secondary care NHS Trusts participated. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted using questions adapted from the Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool which was validated by two clinical trial pharmacists. Keele University Research Ethics Committee provided a favourable ethical opinion. Interview transcripts were analysed to identify emerging themes by using framework analysis. The findings revealed that participants possessed limited knowledge of clinical research in general. The key themes identified were categorised into three domains: individual, professional, and organisational, which corresponded with the RCC tool. In the individual domain, pharmacists demonstrated interest in clinical research delivery but lacked confidence. They acknowledged clinical research as contributing to evidence-based practice and enhancing professional development. However, they expressed concerns about patient harm resulting from trial interventions and poorly designed studies generating misleading data. Within the professional domain, pharmacists' capability to support clinical research delivery was limited by inadequate training in clinical research, their clinical skills, and their disease knowledge. They perceived internal and external barriers to participation. It has been suggested to improve the research culture within the profession and promote the role pharmacists can play in delivering research among other healthcare professionals. In the organisational domain, the workplace environment was perceived to present obstacles due to competing priorities and clinical research not being seen to be a core duty by managers. Additionally, awareness of clinical research opportunities was limited and exposure to clinical research-related activities within the workplace was minimal. Recommendations to address these barriers include promoting clinical research training, developing mentorship programs, creating platforms to connect clinical pharmacists with research opportunities, and identifying roles that allow pharmacists to incorporate clinical research into their routine practice. This research project has several limitations, including the use of a convenience sampling method, a small sample size and potential interviewer bias due to research participants all being known to the researcher. In summary, the pharmacy workforce possesses the potential to support the challenges in clinical research delivery faced by the NHS. However, addressing the perceived barriers is critical to enhancing pharmacist involvement in this field. 1. The Future of Clinical Research Delivery: 2022 to 2025 Implementation Plan [Internet]. UK Government; 2022 [cited 26 May 2023]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-of-uk-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan/the-future-of-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan 2. Kathryn Murray, pharmacist [Internet]. University of Oxford; 2022 [cited 26 May 2023]. Available from: https://www.recoverytrial.net/case_studies/kathryn-murray-pharmacist 3. Martinez J, Laswell E, Cailor S, Ballentine J. Frequency and impact of pharmacist interventions in clinical trial patients with diabetes. Clinical Therapeutics. 2017;39(4):714–22. doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.02.006","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To explore clinical pharmacists’ opinions, and their perceived barriers and facilitators, to supporting clinical research delivery in secondary care\",\"authors\":\"Y. Jiao, J. Shenton\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ijpp/riad074.032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The National Health Service (NHS) is confronted with significant challenges in facilitating clinical research delivery.1 Clinical pharmacists were instrumental in ensuring patient safety while conducting urgent public health studies, such as the RECOVERY trial, during the COVID-19 pandemic.2 Numerous studies have reported the positive impact of pharmacy workforce in supporting clinical research delivery3. However, it remains unclear whether pharmacists are willing to take on this extra responsibility. To explore the opinions of UK clinical pharmacists towards facilitating the delivery of clinical research in secondary care. Objectives include understanding the level of knowledge of clinical research among clinical pharmacists; assessing levels of interest among clinical pharmacists towards supporting clinical research delivery; identifying clinical pharmacists’ perceived barriers and facilitators to supporting clinical research delivery; and developing recommendations to facilitate pharmacists’ engagement in research delivery. This study employed a qualitative research approach and utilised convenience sampling based on the researcher’s professional network. Eight pharmacists from two secondary care NHS Trusts participated. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted using questions adapted from the Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool which was validated by two clinical trial pharmacists. Keele University Research Ethics Committee provided a favourable ethical opinion. Interview transcripts were analysed to identify emerging themes by using framework analysis. The findings revealed that participants possessed limited knowledge of clinical research in general. The key themes identified were categorised into three domains: individual, professional, and organisational, which corresponded with the RCC tool. In the individual domain, pharmacists demonstrated interest in clinical research delivery but lacked confidence. They acknowledged clinical research as contributing to evidence-based practice and enhancing professional development. However, they expressed concerns about patient harm resulting from trial interventions and poorly designed studies generating misleading data. Within the professional domain, pharmacists' capability to support clinical research delivery was limited by inadequate training in clinical research, their clinical skills, and their disease knowledge. They perceived internal and external barriers to participation. It has been suggested to improve the research culture within the profession and promote the role pharmacists can play in delivering research among other healthcare professionals. In the organisational domain, the workplace environment was perceived to present obstacles due to competing priorities and clinical research not being seen to be a core duty by managers. Additionally, awareness of clinical research opportunities was limited and exposure to clinical research-related activities within the workplace was minimal. Recommendations to address these barriers include promoting clinical research training, developing mentorship programs, creating platforms to connect clinical pharmacists with research opportunities, and identifying roles that allow pharmacists to incorporate clinical research into their routine practice. This research project has several limitations, including the use of a convenience sampling method, a small sample size and potential interviewer bias due to research participants all being known to the researcher. In summary, the pharmacy workforce possesses the potential to support the challenges in clinical research delivery faced by the NHS. However, addressing the perceived barriers is critical to enhancing pharmacist involvement in this field. 1. The Future of Clinical Research Delivery: 2022 to 2025 Implementation Plan [Internet]. UK Government; 2022 [cited 26 May 2023]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-of-uk-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan/the-future-of-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan 2. Kathryn Murray, pharmacist [Internet]. University of Oxford; 2022 [cited 26 May 2023]. Available from: https://www.recoverytrial.net/case_studies/kathryn-murray-pharmacist 3. Martinez J, Laswell E, Cailor S, Ballentine J. Frequency and impact of pharmacist interventions in clinical trial patients with diabetes. Clinical Therapeutics. 2017;39(4):714–22. doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.02.006\",\"PeriodicalId\":14284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"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/riad074.032\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riad074.032","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

摘要

1 在 COVID-19 大流行期间,临床药剂师在开展紧急公共卫生研究(如 RECOVERY 试验)时,在确保患者安全方面发挥了重要作用。2 许多研究都报道了药剂师队伍在支持临床研究方面的积极影响3。然而,药剂师是否愿意承担这项额外的责任仍不清楚。 目的:探讨英国临床药剂师对促进二级医疗机构开展临床研究的看法。 目的包括了解临床药剂师对临床研究的了解程度;评估临床药剂师对支持临床研究实施的兴趣程度;确定临床药剂师认为支持临床研究实施的障碍和促进因素;并提出促进药剂师参与研究实施的建议。 本研究采用了定性研究方法,并根据研究人员的专业网络进行了方便抽样。来自两家二级护理 NHS 信托基金会的八名药剂师参与了研究。研究人员使用从研究能力与文化 (RCC) 工具中改编的问题进行了个人半结构式访谈,该工具由两名临床试验药剂师验证。基尔大学研究伦理委员会提供了有利的伦理意见。通过框架分析法对访谈记录进行分析,以确定新出现的主题。 结果显示,参与者对临床研究的总体了解有限。确定的关键主题分为三个领域:个人、专业和组织,这与 RCC 工具相对应。 在个人领域,药剂师表现出对临床研究工作的兴趣,但缺乏信心。他们承认临床研究有助于循证实践和促进专业发展。但是,他们对试验干预造成的患者伤害以及设计不当的研究产生的误导性数据表示担忧。 在专业领域,药剂师支持临床研究的能力受到临床研究培训不足、临床技能和疾病知识的限制。他们认为参与研究存在内部和外部障碍。有人建议改善行业内的研究文化,并向其他医疗保健专业人员宣传药剂师在开展研究方面可以发挥的作用。 在组织方面,他们认为工作场所环境存在障碍,原因是存在相互竞争的优先事项,而且管理人员并不认为临床研究是一项核心职责。此外,人们对临床研究机会的认识有限,在工作场所接触临床研究相关活动的机会也很少。 解决这些障碍的建议包括促进临床研究培训、制定导师计划、创建平台将临床药剂师与研究机会联系起来,以及确定能让药剂师将临床研究纳入日常实践的角色。 本研究项目存在一些局限性,包括采用方便抽样法、样本量较小以及由于研究参与者均为研究人员所熟知,可能存在访谈偏差。 总之,药剂师队伍具有支持应对国家医疗服务体系在临床研究交付方面所面临挑战的潜力。然而,要提高药剂师在这一领域的参与度,关键是要解决他们所感知到的障碍。 1.临床研究实施的未来:2022 年至 2025 年实施计划》[互联网]。英国政府;2022 年 [2023 年 5 月 26 日引用]。Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-of-uk-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan/the-future-of-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan 2.药剂师 Kathryn Murray [Internet].牛津大学;2022 年 [2023 年 5 月 26 日引用]。Available from: https://www.recoverytrial.net/case_studies/kathryn-murray-pharmacist 3.Martinez J, Laswell E, Cailor S, Ballentine J. 《药剂师干预临床试验糖尿病患者的频率和影响》。临床治疗学》。2017;39(4):714–22. doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.02.006
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
To explore clinical pharmacists’ opinions, and their perceived barriers and facilitators, to supporting clinical research delivery in secondary care
The National Health Service (NHS) is confronted with significant challenges in facilitating clinical research delivery.1 Clinical pharmacists were instrumental in ensuring patient safety while conducting urgent public health studies, such as the RECOVERY trial, during the COVID-19 pandemic.2 Numerous studies have reported the positive impact of pharmacy workforce in supporting clinical research delivery3. However, it remains unclear whether pharmacists are willing to take on this extra responsibility. To explore the opinions of UK clinical pharmacists towards facilitating the delivery of clinical research in secondary care. Objectives include understanding the level of knowledge of clinical research among clinical pharmacists; assessing levels of interest among clinical pharmacists towards supporting clinical research delivery; identifying clinical pharmacists’ perceived barriers and facilitators to supporting clinical research delivery; and developing recommendations to facilitate pharmacists’ engagement in research delivery. This study employed a qualitative research approach and utilised convenience sampling based on the researcher’s professional network. Eight pharmacists from two secondary care NHS Trusts participated. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted using questions adapted from the Research Capacity and Culture (RCC) tool which was validated by two clinical trial pharmacists. Keele University Research Ethics Committee provided a favourable ethical opinion. Interview transcripts were analysed to identify emerging themes by using framework analysis. The findings revealed that participants possessed limited knowledge of clinical research in general. The key themes identified were categorised into three domains: individual, professional, and organisational, which corresponded with the RCC tool. In the individual domain, pharmacists demonstrated interest in clinical research delivery but lacked confidence. They acknowledged clinical research as contributing to evidence-based practice and enhancing professional development. However, they expressed concerns about patient harm resulting from trial interventions and poorly designed studies generating misleading data. Within the professional domain, pharmacists' capability to support clinical research delivery was limited by inadequate training in clinical research, their clinical skills, and their disease knowledge. They perceived internal and external barriers to participation. It has been suggested to improve the research culture within the profession and promote the role pharmacists can play in delivering research among other healthcare professionals. In the organisational domain, the workplace environment was perceived to present obstacles due to competing priorities and clinical research not being seen to be a core duty by managers. Additionally, awareness of clinical research opportunities was limited and exposure to clinical research-related activities within the workplace was minimal. Recommendations to address these barriers include promoting clinical research training, developing mentorship programs, creating platforms to connect clinical pharmacists with research opportunities, and identifying roles that allow pharmacists to incorporate clinical research into their routine practice. This research project has several limitations, including the use of a convenience sampling method, a small sample size and potential interviewer bias due to research participants all being known to the researcher. In summary, the pharmacy workforce possesses the potential to support the challenges in clinical research delivery faced by the NHS. However, addressing the perceived barriers is critical to enhancing pharmacist involvement in this field. 1. The Future of Clinical Research Delivery: 2022 to 2025 Implementation Plan [Internet]. UK Government; 2022 [cited 26 May 2023]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-of-uk-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan/the-future-of-clinical-research-delivery-2022-to-2025-implementation-plan 2. Kathryn Murray, pharmacist [Internet]. University of Oxford; 2022 [cited 26 May 2023]. Available from: https://www.recoverytrial.net/case_studies/kathryn-murray-pharmacist 3. Martinez J, Laswell E, Cailor S, Ballentine J. Frequency and impact of pharmacist interventions in clinical trial patients with diabetes. Clinical Therapeutics. 2017;39(4):714–22. doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.02.006
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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