Prevalence of the use of cancer related self-tests by members of the public:A community survey

Background: Self-tests are those where an individual can obtain a result without recourse to a health professional, by getting a result immediately or by sending a sample to a laboratory that returns the result directly. Self-tests can be diagnostic, for disease monitoring, or both. There are currently tests for more than 20 different conditions available to the UK public, and self-testing is marketed as a way of alerting people to serious health problems so they can seek medical help. Almost nothing is known about the extent to which people self-test for cancer or why they do this. Self-tests for cancer could alter perceptions of risk and health behaviour, cause psychological morbidity and have a significant impact on the demand for healthcare. This study aims to gain an understanding of the frequency of self-testing for cancer and characteristics of users. Methods: Cross-sectional survey. Adults registered in participating general practices in the West Midlands Region, will be asked to complete a questionnaire that will collect socio-demographic information and basic data regarding previous and potential future use of self-test kits. The only exclusions will be people who the GP feels it would be inappropriate to send a questionnaire, for example because they are unable to give informed consent. Freepost envelopes will be included and non-responders will receive one reminder. Standardised prevalence rates will be estimated. Discussion: Cancer related self-tests, currently available from pharmacies or over the Internet, include faecal occult blood tests (related to bowel cancer), prostate specific antigen tests (related to prostate cancer), breast cancer kits (self examination guide) and haematuria tests (related to urinary tract cancers). The effect of an increase in self-testing for cancer is unknown but may be considerable: it may affect the delivery of population based screening programmes; empower patients or cause unnecessary anxiety; reduce costs on existing healthcare services or increase demand to investigate patients with positive test results. It is important that more is known about the characteristics of those who are using self-tests if we are to determine the potential impact on health services and the public. © 2006 Wilson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Community pharmacists' engagement with public health in Great Britain

Objective - The objective of the research was to examine to what extent community pharmacists in Great Britain believed that their job was concerned with local public health issues. Methods - The project (Pharmacy and Public Health)received ethical approval from the Research Ethics Committee of the School of Life and Health Sciences at Aston University. After piloting, in August 2006 a self-completion postal questionnaire was sent to practicing community pharmacists in Great Britain (n=1998), with a follow-up to non-responders 4 weeks later. A final response rate of 51% (n=1023/1998) was achieved. Results - Respondents were asked to indicate their answer to the question “to what extent is your present job concerned with local public health issues?” on a three-point scale – “highly”, “slightly” or “not at all” concerned with public health. They were also asked to indicate whether they were pharmacy owners, employee pharmacists or self-employed locum pharmacists. Less than half (43%,n=384/898) of respondents answering both questions believed that their job was highly concerned with public health. A relationship was observed between employment status and the level to which a respondent believed that their job was concerned with public health (chi-square test with P=0.001). Over half of pharmacy owners (51%, n=68/134) considered that their job was highly concerned with public health compared to44% (n=193/443) of employee pharmacists and38% (n=123/321) of locum pharmacists. Conclusion - This research suggests that community pharmacists in Great Britain are not ‘fully engaged’ with public health. Pharmacy owners may feel more enfranchised in the public health movement than their employees and locums. Indeed, one-in-ten locums reported that their job was not at all concerned with public health which, as locum pharmacists constitute over a third of actively employed community pharmacists, could be limiting factor in any drive to strengthen the public health function of community pharmacists.

Developing the public health function of locum pharmacists under the auspices of the new pharmacy contract

Focal Point - There are reduced opportunities for locum pharmacists to access training and education that meets their needs and enables them to play a full role under the new pharmacy contract - Eighty-six per cent of locums consider themselves to be more health professional than business person, compared to just 48% of pharmacy owners - Forty per cent of locums believe that a lack of access to training is a major barrier to the development of their public health function - While locum pharmacists are arguably more likely to embrace 'professionalising', patient-care-based roles, they are also the group least likely to be able to access the necessary training to fulfill such roles Introduction It has been suggested that locum pharmacists do not want the business-based responsibilities (e.g. staff management, meeting targets, etc) that come with pharmacy management.1 Research also suggests that locums derive great satisfaction from the health-professional aspects of the pharmacists’ role (e.g. patient contact, the provision of advice, etc).1 However, upon the introduction of the new pharmacy contract (April 2005), concerns were expressed that it was becoming increasingly difficult for locum pharmacists to access training and education that would meet their needs and enable them to play a full role under the new framework.2,3 Method After piloting, in August 2006 a self-completion postal questionnaire was sent to a random sample of practising community pharmacists, stratified for country and sex, within Great Britain (n = 1998), with a follow-up to non-responders 4 weeks later. Data were analysed using SPSS (v12.0). A final response rate of 51% (n = 1023/1998) was achieved. Respondents were asked ‘indicate how you view yourself as a pharmacist’ – in terms of their relative focus on the health-professional and business aspects of their role. Respondents were also asked ‘do you consider a lack of training opportunities to be a barrier to the development of the public health role of community pharmacists?’. Results Locums were significantly more likely than owners or employees to consider each factor a major barrier. Discussion Four in 10 locums consider a lack of training opportunities to constitute a major barrier to the development of their public health function. Pharmacy may not be able to provide the services required of it by the policy agenda if pharmacists are unable to be involved in extended role activities through a lack of training opportunities. Therefore, the paradox that needs to be addressed is that while locum pharmacists are arguably more likely to embrace ‘professionalising’, patient-care-based roles, they are also the group least likely to be able to access training to fulfil such roles. The training needs of this large subset of the pharmacist population need to be assessed and met if the whole community pharmacy workforce is going to maximise its contribution to public health under the new contractual framework. References 1 Shann P, Hassell K. An exploration of the diversity and complexity of the pharmacy locum workforce. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain; 2004. 2 Almond M. Locums – key players in workforce – cast adrift as contract launched. Pharm J 2005;274:420. 3 Bishop DH. A lack of appreciation of what really happens. Pharm J 2005;274:451.

Community pharmacy in a commissioning-led NHS:can pharmacy compete effectively?

Introduction – The commissioning of services has been a core responsibility of English Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) since 2002. Primary care organisations (PCOs) in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have also increased their commissioning activities but with, arguably, less fervour than their English counterparts. The commissioning function of English PCTs has been reinforced by the introduction of new contractual frameworks across primary care – for medical services, dentistry and pharmacy. The new pharmaceutical services contract for England and Wales introduced an “enhanced” category of services, the provision of which is dependent on the commissioning decisions of local PCTs. As the NHS, most pertinently in England, continues its transformation from a provider to a commissioner of healthcare, the ability of pharmacy to compete effectively for funding is likely to become increasingly important. Method - After piloting, in August 2006 a self-completion postal questionnaire was sent to a random sample of practising community pharmacists, stratified for country and sex, within Great Britain (n=1998), with a follow-up to non-responders 4 weeks later. Data were analysed using SPSS (v12.0). A final response rate of 51% (n=1023/1998) was achieved. Within the section of the questionnaire relating to service provision, respondents were asked “do you believe that pharmacy will be able to compete effectively with other healthcare providers for access to additional funding to develop services that address a public health need identified by your local Primary Care Organisation (PCO), e.g. PCT/LHB etc.?”. Answers were recorded on a three-point scale; pharmacy “will”, “may”, or “will not” be able to compete effectively for funding. Results - The attitudes of pharmacists showed variation depending on the type of pharmacy they worked in (supermarket, multiple (outlets (n)=200), large chain (200>n>20), small chain (20=n>5), or independent (n=5)) (?2 test with p=0.001). Over a third of survey pharmacists working in small chains and independents (37% (n=21/57) and 33% (n=113/341) respectively) believed that pharmacy would not be able to compete effectively for funding compared to 23% (n=15/65) for supermarket pharmacists, 22% (n=21/97) for pharmacists employed by large chains and just 18% (n=62/353) for pharmacists employed most regularly in multiples. Furthermore, attitudes also varied between the countries of residence of respondents (?2 test with p<0.05). 27% (n=242/893) of pharmacists resident in England and Wales believed that pharmacy would not be able to compete compared to 16% (n=18/116) of pharmacists resident in Scotland. Conclusions – It would appear that community pharmacists believe that the larger pharmacy chains and supermarkets will occupy an advantageous position in terms of attracting finance to develop services. This could have notable implications for service provision across the sector. If corporate pharmacy chains were to monopolise commissioning monies then the proportion of funding available to independents will be diminished; arguably further hastening their demise, as well as stifling the professional development of pharmacists employed within the independent sector. These findings, when combined with the variation observed between UK pharmacists operating under different contractual frameworks, may be a reflection of the divergent policy in the different administrations with developments in England, including the new pharmacy contract, reflecting a market-based approach with Scotland taking a near opposite stance with service integration and a commitment to new public health. However, it should be acknowledged that the questionnaire did not allow for detection of ambiguities in, or misunderstandings of, the survey question and this should be considered as a limitation of the research.