Views of pharmacy graduates and pharmacist tutors on evidence-based practice in relation to over-the-counter consultations: a qualitative study

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Health care services offered to the public should be based on the best available evidence. We aimed to explore pharmacy tutors' and trainees' views on the importance of evidence when making decisions about over-the-counter (OTC) medicines and also to investigate whether the tutor influenced the trainee in practice.

METHODS: Following ethical approval and piloting, semi-structured interviews were conducted with pharmacy graduates (trainees) and pharmacist tutors. Transcribed interview data were entered into the NVivo software package (version 10), coded and analysed via thematic analysis.

RESULTS: Twelve trainees (five males, seven females) and 11 tutors (five males, six females) participated. Main themes that emerged were (in)consistency and contradiction, confidence, acculturation, and continuation and perpetuation. Despite having an awareness of the importance and potential benefits, an evidence-based approach did not seem to be routinely or consistently implemented in practice. Confidence in products was largely derived from personal use and patient feedback. A lack of discussion about evidence was justified on the basis of not wanting to lessen patient confidence in requested product(s) or possibly negating the placebo effect. Trainees became acculturated to 'real-life' practice; university teaching and evidence was deemed less relevant than meeting customer expectations. The tutor's actions were mirrored by their trainee resulting in continuation and perpetuation of the same professional attitudes and behaviours.

CONCLUSIONS: Evidence appeared to have limited influence on OTC decision making. The tutor played a key role in the trainee's professional development. More work could be performed to investigate how evidence can be regarded as relevant and something that is consistently implemented in practice.

Pharmacist-led feedback workshops increase appropriate prescribing of antimicrobials

Objectives To investigate whether and how structured feedback sessions can increase rates of appropriate antimicrobial prescribing by junior doctors.

Methods This was a mixed-methods study, with a conceptual orientation towards complexity and systems thinking. Fourteen junior doctors, in their first year of training, were randomized to intervention (feedback) and 21 to control (routine practice) groups in a single UK teaching hospital. Feedback on their antimicrobial prescribing was given, in writing and via group sessions. Pharmacists assessed the appropriateness of all new antimicrobial prescriptions 2 days per week for 6 months (46 days). The mean normalized prescribing rates of suboptimal to all prescribing were compared between groups using the t-test. Thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with 10 participants investigated whether and how the intervention had impact.

Results Data were collected on 204 prescriptions for 166 patients. For the intervention group, the mean normalized rate of suboptimal to all prescribing was 0.32 ± 0.36; for the control group, it was 0.68 ± 0.36. The normalized rates of suboptimal prescribing were significantly different between the groups (P = 0.0005). The qualitative data showed that individuals' prescribing behaviour was influenced by a complex series of dynamic interactions between individual and social variables, such as interplay between personal knowledge and the expectations of others.

Conclusions The feedback intervention increased appropriate prescribing by acting as a positive stimulus within a complex network of behavioural influences. Prescribing behaviour is adaptive and can be positively influenced by structured feedback. Changing doctors' perceptions of acceptable, typical and best practice could reduce suboptimal antimicrobial prescribing.