Non-medical prescribing in Australia

The announcement in the 2009 federal budget to allow nurse practitioners and midwives access to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Medicare Benefits Scheme,1and the subsequent announcement of a November 2010 start date,2has brought non-medical prescribing into the public arena. Non-medical prescribing is not a new concept in Australia as nurse practitioners, podiatrists and optometrists have been authorised to prescribe under various state legislations for some time. However, state legislation is not uniform in relation to authorisation or formulary. Midwives are currently seeking prescribing rights,3and other groups such as physiotherapists and pharmacists are likely to seek them in the future.

Roles of the non-medical prescribing leads within organisations across a Strategic Health Authority: perceived functions and factors supporting the role

Objectives Extending the roles of nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals to include prescribing has been identified as one way of improving service provision. In the UK, over 50 000 non-medical healthcare professionals are now qualified to prescribe. Implementation of non-medical prescribing ( NMP) is crucial to realise the potential return on investment. The UK Department of Health recommends a NMP lead to be responsible for the implementation of NMP within organisations. The aim of this study was to explore the role of NMP leads in organisations across one Strategic Health Authority (SHA) and to inform future planning with regards to the criteria for those adopting this role, the scope of the role and factors enabling the successful execution of the role. Methods Thirty-nine NMP leads across one SHA were approached. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted. Issues explored included the perceived role of the NMP lead, safety and clinical governance procedures and facilitators to the role. Transcribed audiotapes were coded and analysed using thematic analytical techniques. Key findings In total, 27/39 (69.2%) NMP leads were interviewed. The findings highlight the key role that the NMP lead plays with regards to the support and development of NMP within National Health Service trusts. Processes used to appoint NMP leads lacked clarity and varied between trusts. Only two NMP leads had designated or protected time for their role. Strategic influence, operational management and clinical governance were identified as key functions. Factors that supported the role included organisational support, level of influence and dedicated time. Conclusion The NMP lead plays a significant role in the development and implementation of NMP. Clear national guidance is needed with regards to the functions of this role, the necessary attributes for individuals recruited into this post and the time that should be designated to it. This is important as prescribing is extended to include other groups of non-medical healthcare professionals.

Non-medical prescribers and benzodiazepines: A qualitative study.

Benzodiazepines continue to be widely prescribed in primary care for longer than guidelines advise and can cause adverse consequences for those who have long-term prescriptions. The aim of this study was to explore the experience of nonmedical prescribers (NMPs) in relation to their role in improving benzodiazepine prescribing management in primary care. A qualitative study using a thematic analysis framework, in which face-to-face interviews with eight NMPs from the disciplines of nursing and pharmacy were conducted in their areas of practice in 2011 in rural localities in southern Scotland. The NMPs view their qualification as rigorous in its capacity to promote more focused and confident practice, and provide detailed knowledge about medications and the ability to question the appropriateness of medicines. As medication review is an integral part of the role of the NMP they are suited to contribute positively to benzodiazepine prescribing management. Although several obstacles to the successful integration and full utilization of non-medical prescribing currently exist, more training in the recognition of mild-to-moderate mental health problems, psychopharmacology and alternative interventions would allow this role to be assumed with confidence. NMPs may have a useful role to play in benzodiazepine prescribing. NMPs have regular contact with patients in the older age group and those with chronic illnesses, and are in a prime position to utilize opportunistic medication review to improve concordance in this area of prescribing.

Multidisciplinary review of teaching and assessing competency attainment by non-medical prescribers

Background Prescribing is a complex task, requiring specific knowledge and skills, and the execution of effective, context-specific clinical reasoning. Systematic reviews indicate medical prescribing errors have a median rate of 7% [IQR 2%-14%] of medication orders [1-3]. For podiatrists pursuing prescribing rights, a clear need exists to ensure practitioners develop a well-defined set of prescribing skills, which will contribute to competent, safe and appropriate practice. Aim To investigate the methods employed to teach and assess the principles of effective prescribing in the undergraduate podiatry program and compare and contrast these findings with four other non-medical professions who undertake prescribing after training at Queensland University of Technology. Method The NPS National Prescribing Competency Standards were employed as the prescribing standard. A curriculum mapping exercise was undertaken to determine whether the prescribing principles articulated in the competency standards were addressed by each profession. Results A range of methods are currently utilised to teach prescribing across disciplines. Application of prescribing competencies to the context of each profession appears to influence the teaching methods used. Most competencies were taught using a multimodal format, including interactive lectures, self-directed learning, tutorial sessions and clinical placement. In particular clinical training was identified as the most consistent form of educating safe prescribers across all five disciplines. Assessment of prescribing competency utilised multiple techniques including written and oral examinations and research tasks, case studies, objective structured clinical examination exercises and the assessment of clinical practice. Effective and reliable assessment of prescribing undertaken by students in diverse settings remains challenging e.g. that occurring in the clinical practice environment. Conclusion Recommendations were made to refine curricula and to promote efficient cross-discipline teaching by staff from the disciplines of podiatry, pharmacy, nurse practitioner, optometry and paramedic science. Students now experience a sophisticated level of multidisciplinary learning in the clinical setting which integrates the expertise and skills of experience prescribers combined with innovative information technology platforms (CCTV and live patient assessments). Further work is required to establish a practical, effective approach to the assessment of prescribing competence especially between the university and clinical settings.

Perioperative medication management: expanding the role of the preadmission clinic pharmacist in a single centre, randomised controlled trial of collaborative prescribing

Objectives Current evidence to support non-medical prescribing is predominantly qualitative, with little evaluation of accuracy, safety and appropriateness. Our aim was to evaluate a new model of service for the Australia healthcare system, of inpatient medication prescribing by a pharmacist in an elective surgery preadmission clinic (PAC) against usual care, using an endorsed performance framework. Design Single centre, randomised controlled, two-arm trial. Setting Elective surgery PAC in a Brisbane-based tertiary hospital. Participants 400 adults scheduled for elective surgery were randomised to intervention or control. Intervention A pharmacist generated the inpatient medication chart to reflect the patient's regular medication, made a plan for medication perioperatively and prescribed venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. In the control arm, the medication chart was generated by the Resident Medical Officers. Outcome measures Primary outcome was frequency of omissions and prescribing errors when compared against the medication history. The clinical significance of omissions was also analysed. Secondary outcome was appropriateness of VTE prophylaxis prescribing. Results There were significantly less unintended omissions of medications: 11 of 887 (1.2%) intervention orders compared with 383 of 1217 (31.5%) control (p<0.001). There were significantly less prescribing errors involving selection of drug, dose or frequency: 2 in 857 (0.2%) intervention orders compared with 51 in 807 (6.3%) control (p<0.001). Orders with at least one component of the prescription missing, incorrect or unclear occurred in 208 of 904 (23%) intervention orders and 445 of 1034 (43%) controls (p<0.001). VTE prophylaxis on admission to the ward was appropriate in 93% of intervention patients and 90% controls (p=0.29). Conclusions Medication charts in the intervention arm contained fewer clinically significant omissions, and prescribing errors, when compared with controls. There was no difference in appropriateness of VTE prophylaxis on admission between the two groups.

Hospital pharmacists' views on collaborative pharmacist prescribing

In 2008, Weeks et al. published the results of a postal survey, which explored the views of the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia’s (SHPA) members on collaborative prescribing, and the extent of de facto prescribing in their institution. Since then, significant work has been undertaken on non-medical prescribing, such as pilots of pharmacist prescribing across Australia and a National Health Workforce report on developing a nationally consistent approach to prescribing by nonmedical health professionals. The first stage of the Health Workforce Australia Health Practitioner Prescribing Pathway project is complete and the recommendations for implementation have been approved by the Standing Council in November 2013. New Zealand pharmacists obtained prescribing rights in 2013, and the first cohort of 14 prescribers have completed the postgraduate pharmacist prescribing course (jointly run by the Otago and Auckland Universities).

Nurse Prescribing in Acute and Chronic Pain Management

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Acute pain Chronic pain Rationale for service development Evaluation use of audit and CPD Justifying the advanced nursing contribution to develop nurse prescribing in pain management Conclusions References

A pilot study to assess the appropriateness of prescribing from a collaborative pharmacist prescribing study in a surgical pre admission clinic

Background Current evidence to support non-medical prescribing is predominantly qualitative, with little evaluation of appropriateness. This study aims to evaluate the appropriateness of prescribing, and significance of omissions, from a doctor pharmacist collaborative prescribing model in an elective surgery pre admission clinic (PAC). Method A modified version of the Medication Appropriate Index (MAI) was developed, piloted and subsequently used by an expert panel, comprised of a surgeon, anaesthetist, clinical pharmacologist, pharmacist, resident medical officer (RMO) and clinical nurse. The tool was used to rate the appropriateness of prescribing of medications, and the significance of omissions in a 5% sample (N=19) of the total cohort from a randomised, controlled two arm trial of doctor-pharmacist collaborative prescribing. Results When reviewer assessments were combined, 32 out of 294 (10.9%) medications assessed for appropriateness in the control arm were classed as inappropriate, compared to 13 of 266 (4.9%) in the intervention arm. Out of 89 regular medications in the control arm, 25 (28%) were omitted from the medication charts, compared to 1 out of 55 (2%) in the intervention arm (p<0.001, fishers exact) On average, 52% of omissions in the control arm were judged to have potential for patient harm or ward inconvenience. Conclusion For the appropriateness of prescribing, overall results were similar between arms, as judged by individual panel members. Medication charts in the control arm contained significantly more omissions than in the intervention arm, a number of which were rated by the panel members as having the potential for patient harm or ward inconvenience.

Non-medical prescribers and pharmacovigilance:participation, competence and future needs

To determine UK non-medical prescribers' (NMPs) (supplementary or independent) current participation and self-reported competence in pharmacovigilance, and their perceptions of training and future needs.

A patient perspective of pharmacist prescribing: 'crossing the specialisms-crossing the illnesses'

Background: The drive for non-medical prescribing has progressed quickly since the late 1990s and involves a range of healthcare professionals including pharmacists. As part of a commissioned research project, this qualitative element of a larger case study focused on the views of patients of pharmacist prescribers. 

Objective: The aim of this study was to explore patients' perspectives of pharmacists as prescribers. 

Methods: Three pharmacists working as independent prescribers in the clinical areas of (i) hypertension, (ii) cardiovascular/diabetes management, (iii) anticoagulation were recruited to three case studies of pharmacist prescribing in Northern Ireland. One hundred and five patients were invited to participate in focus groups after they had been prescribed for by the pharmacist. Focus groups took place between November 2010 and March 2011 (ethical/governance approvals granted) were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, read independently by two authors and analysed using constant comparative analysis. 

Results: Thirty-four patients agreed to participate across seven focus groups. Analysis revealed the emergence of one overarching theme: team approach to patient care. A number of subthemes related to the role of the pharmacist, the role of the doctor and patient benefits. There was an overwhelming lack of awareness of pharmacist prescribing. Patients discussed the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to their care and recognized limitations of the current model of prescribing. 

Conclusion: Patients were positive about pharmacist prescribing and felt that a team approach to their care was the ideal model especially when treating those with more complex conditions. Despite positive attitudes, there was a general lack of awareness of this new mode of practice.