Health care consumers’ perspectives on pharmacist integration into private general practitioner clinics in Malaysia: A qualitative study

Background Pharmacists are considered medication experts but are underutilized and exist mainly at the periphery of the Malaysian primary health care team. Private general practitioners (GPs) in Malaysia are granted rights under the Poison Act 1952 to prescribe and dispense medications at their primary care clinics. As most consumers obtain their medications from their GPs, community pharmacists’ involvement in ensuring safe use of medicines is limited. The integration of a pharmacist into private GP clinics has the potential to contribute to quality use of medicines. This study aims to explore health care consumers’ views on the integration of pharmacists within private GP clinics in Malaysia. Methods A purposive sample of health care consumers in Selangor and Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, were invited to participate in focus groups and semi-structured interviews. Sessions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed using NVivo 10. Results A total of 24 health care consumers participated in two focus groups and six semi-structured interviews. Four major themes were identified: 1) pharmacists’ role viewed mainly as supplying medications, 2) readiness to accept pharmacists in private GP clinics, 3) willingness to pay for pharmacy services, and 4) concerns about GPs’ resistance to pharmacist integration. Consumers felt that a pharmacist integrated into a private GP clinic could offer potential benefits such as to provide trustworthy information on the use and potential side effects of medications and screening for medication misadventure. The potential increase in costs passed on to consumers and GPs’ reluctance were perceived as barriers to integration. Conclusion This study provides insights into consumers’ perspectives on the roles of pharmacists within private GP clinics in Malaysia. Consumers generally supported pharmacist integration into private primary health care clinics. However, for pharmacists to expand their capacity in providing integrated and collaborative primary care services to consumers, barriers to pharmacist integration need to be addressed.

Making the transition from pharmacy student to pharmacist: Australian interns' perceptions of professional identity formation

Objectives The experience of transitioning from university to practice influences professional identity formation. It is unclear how this transitioning experience influences pharmacy interns' professional identities. This study aims to examine pharmacy interns' perceptions of their transition from university to the workplace and the influence this had on their pharmacist identities. Methods A qualitative approach using in-depth interviews was adopted for this study. Fifteen interns (community and hospital) from one school of pharmacy in Australia were interviewed. Questions were asked about the nature of their current intern role, their university experiences, how they saw themselves as pharmacists and their perceptions of the transition to practice. Key findings The interns interviewed entered the workplace valuing patient-focused aspects of practice and contributing to patient care. The nature of work meant there were limited opportunities to enact these aspects of their professional identities. The interns were challenged by interactions with patients and doctors, and experienced difficulties reconciling this with their university-derived professional identities. Also, the interns lacked the confidence and strategies to overcome these challenges. Some were exploring alternative ways of being pharmacists. Conclusions This paper argues that graduates' experience of the transition to practice was challenging. This was due to nascent professional identities formed in university and a lack of workplace experiences enabling patient-centred practices. The interns' formation of professional identities was highly responsive to the context of work. To facilitate the development of Australian patient-centred pharmacy practice, supporting professional identity formation should be a focus within pharmacy education.

Sun, sun and more sun — how to register as a pharmacist in Australia

To me, Australia has always seemed like an alluring destination, with its beautiful beaches, amazing wildlife and beautiful coastal cities. For some years, there have been many pharmacists who have enjoyed working and travelling around this country. Recently, though, there have been a number of changes made to the registration process, which has made this aspiration more difficult...

Up close and personal with those experiencing homelessness: Pharmacist involvement in a multidisciplinary healthcare team

Introduction. The Brisbane City Council holds a biannual Homeless Connect event which brings together business and community groups on one day to provide free services to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Pharmacists were involved in this initiative and provided health services in a multidisciplinary healthcare environment building on the lessons of previous Homeless Connect events (Chan et al, 2015) Aims. To explore pharmacists reflections on their role in a multidisciplinary healthcare team providing services at a community outreach event for those experiencing homelessness. Methods. The pharmacists (n=2) documented the types of services provided during the Homeless Connect event. A semi-structured interview was conducted post-event to investigate barriers, facilitators and changes that would be recommended for future events. Their perceptions of their role in the multidisciplinary healthcare team were also explored. Results. Primarily, the services provided included delivery of primary healthcare, advice on accessing cost effective pharmacy services and addressing medication enquiries. The pharmacists also provided moisturiser samples and health information leaflets. Interdisciplinary referrals were primarily between the pharmacists and podiatrists; no pharmacist-medical practitioner referrals occurred. The pharmacists did believe they had a positive role in this health initiative but improvements could be implemented to improve the delivery of these services in future events. Discussion. Pharmacists can play an important role in providing services to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness and the overall experience was positive for the pharmacists. They were able to integrate into a multidisciplinary healthcare team in this setting but strategies for further collaboration were identified. The possibility of involving pharmacy students in future events was identified.

A systematic review of community pharmacist therapeutic knowledge of dietary supplements

Background: Internationally, the use of dietary supplements has been growing rapidly. Patient support for pharmacist sales of nutritional and dietary supplements is also strong. The increase in demand for nutritional and dietary supplements and subsequent advice about these products, however, makes it necessary that pharmacists maintain a contemporary knowledge of the area. Aim of review: This systematic review was conducted to examine the current evidence regarding the level of the nutritional and dietary supplement knowledge of community pharmacists and their understanding of their therapeutic effects. Method: Electronic databases including Medline, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Scifinder and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched. Studies assessing nutritional knowledge of pharmacists in community pharmacies were eligible for inclusion. All languages and study designs were considered. Study results were analysed and pharmacist knowledge scores were given out of 100 . Results: From 5594 studies identified, nine met the inclusion criteria. Each study tested pharmacist knowledge with predetermined questions calculating results as the number of questions answered correctly. These knowledge scores were converted to a percentage score for the purpose of this paper. The median knowledge score across all papers was 64%. A lack of studies assessing community pharmacist's knowledge of commonly sold vitamins and minerals was observed. Conclusions Global community pharmacist knowledge of dietary supplements appears to be poor. Community pharmacists have an professional responsibility to provide accurate health information about dietary supplements as they do for any other therapies they provide to patients. Further research including that which assesses pharmacist's therapeutic knowledge of commonly sold vitamins and minerals is suggested.

Pharmacist review prevents evolving metformin-associated lactic acidosis

What is known There is controversy surrounding the risk of metformin and the development of lactic acidosis. There have been no reports of a pharmacist preventing a patient developing metformin-associated lactic acidosis. Objectives Our objective was to report on a pharmacist potentially preventing an evolving case of metformin-associated lactic acidosis (MALA). Case description A patient who had been having episodes of nausea and vomiting for a year was referred for a home medicines review (HMR) by his general practitioner. The pharmacist who conducted the HMR suspected that the patient's symptoms could have been due to metformin. It was recommended to measure the serum lactate level and suspend metformin. Our patient was found to have a high lactate level and was referred to the emergency department by his general practitioner. Recovery was prompt with symptomatic support and cessation of metformin. What is new This appears to be the first case reported in the literature of a pharmacist recognizing an evolving case of MALA. Conclusion Although the incidence of MALA is rare, health professionals should be aware of the initial symptoms of lactic acidosis, especially in elderly patients with risk factors, to prevent a fatal lactic acidosis event.

Australia’s first Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot – who did pharmacists jab with a needle again? QPIP2

Introduction. The successful rollout of the Queensland Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot (QPIP1) led to expansion of the pilot into Phase 2 (QPIP2), which saw pharmacists being permitted to vaccinate adults for not only influenza, but also measles and pertussis in community pharmacies. The extremely positive results from QPIP1 paved the way for expanding the scope of pharmacists across Australia. Aims. The aim was to continue to investigate the benefits of trained pharmacists administering vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. Methods. Participant demographics and previous influenza vaccination experiences were recorded using GuildCare software. Participants also completed a ‘post-vaccination satisfaction survey’ after receiving their vaccination. Results. To date, 22,467 influenza vaccines, 1441 pertussis and 22 measles vaccinations have been administered by pharmacists. Females accounted for 57% of the participants, with the majority of the participants aged between 46-65 years of age (51.2%). It was interesting to note that 18.9% of the participants were eligible to receive a free vaccination from the National Immunisation Program, but still opted to be vaccinated by a pharmacist in a community pharmacy setting. Participants reported a positive experience with the pharmacist vaccination service; reporting they were happy to receive vaccinations from a pharmacy in the future, and being happy to recommend the service to others. Discussion. The overwhelmingly positive uptake of this pharmacist vaccination service is demonstrated by a 100% increase in the number of influenza vaccines administered as part of QPIP1, and the ongoing positive feedback from patients. These findings will continue to pave the way for expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists across the country.

Beyond vaccination: The benefits of having a pharmacist behind the syringe

Background: The Queensland Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot which ran in 2014 was Australia’s first to allow pharmacists to administer vaccinations. Aim: An aim of the pilot was to investigate the benefits of trained pharmacists administering vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. Methods: Participant demographics and previous influenza vaccination experiences were recorded using GuildCare software. Participants also completed a ‘post-vaccination satisfaction survey’ following their influenza vaccination. Results: A total of 10889 participant records and 8737 satisfaction surveys were analysed. Overall, 1.9% of participants lived with a chronic illness, and 22.5% took concomitant medications. As part of the consultation before receiving the influenza vaccination, participants acknowledged the opportunity to discuss other aspects of their health with the pharmacist, including concerns about their general health, allergies, and other medications they were taking. It was worth noting that 17.5% of people would not have received an influenza vaccination if the pharmacist vaccination service was unavailable. Additionally, approximately 10% of all participants were eligible to receive a free vaccination from the National Immunisation Program, but still opted to receive their vaccine from a pharmacist. Conclusion: The findings from this pilot demonstrate the benefit of a pharmacist vaccination program in increasing vaccination rates, and have helped pave the way for expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists.

Preparing pharmacists to vaccinate in Australia’s first Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot

Background: In November 2013, the Queensland Department of Health announced its intention to pilot pharmacist vaccination for influenza in the 2014 flu season. The Pharmaceutical Society of Australia Queensland Branch was tasked with developing a training program for the pilot. Aim: The aim was to develop, implement and evaluate a training program for pharmacist vaccination relevant to the needs of Australian pharmacists. Method: Background content was delivered via two online modules, while training for practical injection skills and anaphylaxis management were provided in a face-to-face workshop. Participants were required to complete the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA) anaphylaxis e-training for pharmacists, and hold a current First-Aid and CPR certificate. On completion of the course, pharmacists were asked to evaluate the training program. Results: Overall, 157 pharmacists across Queensland completed the training. Participants rated the training highly on a 5-point Likert scale (>4.4 for all fields) for relevance to practice, comfort with the skill, confidence to do the task and relevance of the learning objectives to the training. Qualitative feedback indicated that a key component of the training was the ability to practice injections on each other. Conclusion: The findings demonstrate participants felt prepared for vaccination following completion of the training program, as reflected in the high level of confidence reported. A follow-up post-pilot will explore if this confidence was translated into practice during the implementation phase.

Who was vaccinated in Australia’s first Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot?

Background: The Queensland Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot which ran in 2014 was Australia’s first to allow pharmacists vaccination. Aim: The aim was to explore demographics of people vaccinated by a pharmacist, and their satisfaction with the service. Method: Demographics and previous influenza vaccination experiences were recorded using GuildCare software, and participants completed a ‘post-vaccination satisfaction survey’ after their influenza vaccination. Results: A total of 10889 participant records were analysed and >8000 participants completed the post-vaccination survey. Males accounted for 37% of participants, with the majority of participants aged between 45-64 years (53%). Overall, 49% of participants had been vaccinated before, the majority at a GP clinic (60%). Most participants reported receiving their previous influenza vaccination from a nurse (61%). Interestingly, 1% thought a pharmacist had administered their previous vaccination, while 7% were unsure who had administered it. It was also of note that approximately 10% of all participants were eligible to receive a free vaccination from the National Immunisation Program, but opted to receive their vaccine in a pharmacy. Overall, 95% were happy to receive their vaccination from a pharmacy in the future and 97% would recommend this service to other people. Conclusion: Participants were overwhelmingly positive in their response to the pharmacist vaccination pilot. These findings have helped pave the way for expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists with the aim to increase vaccination rates across the state.

Who did pharmacists vaccinate in Australia’s first Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot?

Introduction: The Queensland Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot (QPIP) began in April 2014, and was Australia’s first to allow pharmacists vaccination. An aim of QPIP was to investigate participants’ satisfaction with the service, and their overall experience with the service. Method: Patient demographics and previous influenza vaccination experiences were recorded using GuildCare software. After receiving the influenza vaccine from the pharmacist, participants were asked to complete a ‘post-vaccination satisfaction questionnaire’. Results: A total of 10,889 participants received influenza vaccinations from a pharmacist, and >8000 participants completed the post-vaccination survey. Males accounted for 37% of participants, with the majority of participants aged between 45-64 years (53%). Almost half of the participants had been vaccinated before, the majority at a GP clinic (60%), and most participants reported receiving their previous influenza vaccination from a nurse (61%). Interestingly, 7% were unsure which healthcare professional had vaccinated them, and 1% thought a pharmacist had administered their previous vaccination. It was also noteworthy that approximately 10% of all participants were eligible to receive a free vaccination under the National Immunisation Program, but opted to receive their vaccine in a pharmacy. Overall, 95% were happy to receive their vaccination from a pharmacy in the future and 97% would recommend this service to other people. Conclusion: Participants were overwhelmingly positive in their response to the pharmacist vaccination pilot. These findings have paved the way for expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists with the aim to increase vaccination rates across the country. The pilot has now been expanded to include the administration of vaccinations for measles and pertussis.

Pharmacist vaccination – an Australian first, but what was the impact?

Introduction/background/issues The Queensland Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot is Australia’s first to allow pharmacists vaccination. The pilot ran between April 1st 2014 and August 31st 2014, with pharmacists administering influenza vaccination during the flu season. The aim of this work was to investigate the benefits of trained registered pharmacists administering vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. Methods Participant demographics and previous influenza vaccination experiences were recorded using GuildCare software. Participants also completed a ‘post-vaccination satisfaction survey’ following their influenza vaccination. Results/discussions A total of 10,889 participant records were analysed. Females accounted for 63% of participants, with the majority of participants aged between 45-64 years (53%). Overall, 49% of participants had been vaccinated before, the majority at a GP clinic (60%). Most participants reported receiving their previous influenza vaccination from a nurse (61%). Interestingly, 1% thought a pharmacist had administered their previous vaccination, while 7% were unsure which health professional had administered it. It was also of note that approximately 10% of all participants were eligible to receive a free vaccination from the National Immunisation Program, but still opted to receive their vaccine in a pharmacy. Over 8,000 participants took part in the post-vaccination survey, 93% were happy to receive their vaccination from a pharmacy in the future while 94% would recommend this service to other people. The remaining 7% and 6% respectively had omitted to fill in those questions. Conclusions/implications These findings have helped pave the way for expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists with the aim to increase vaccination rates across Australia. Key message • Scope of practice and ability for health providers like pharmacists to provide services such as vaccination in primary care. • New service delivery to improve access to service, and increase immunisation rates.

The health professional behind the syringe: Benefits of a pharmacist vaccination program

Background: The Queensland Pharmacist Immunisation Pilot (QPIP) which ran in 2014 was Australia’s first to allow pharmacists to administer vaccinations. An aim of QPIP was to investigate the benefits of trained pharmacists administering vaccinations in a community pharmacy setting. Methods: Participant demographics and previous influenza vaccination experiences were recorded using GuildCare software. Participants also completed a ‘post-vaccination satisfaction survey’ following their influenza vaccination. Results: A total of 10,889 participant records and 8,737 satisfaction surveys were analysed. Overall, 1.9% of the participants reported living with a chronic illness, and 22.5% were taking concomitant medications. As part of the consultation before receiving the vaccine, participants acknowledged the opportunity to discuss other aspects of their health with the pharmacist, including concerns about their general health, allergies, and other medications they were taking. It was worth noting that 17.5% of people would not have received an influenza vaccination if the QPIP service was unavailable. Additionally, approximately 10% of all participants were eligible to receive a free vaccination from the National Immunisation Program, but still opted to receive their vaccine from a pharmacist. Conclusion: The findings from this pilot demonstrate the benefit of a pharmacist vaccination program in increasing vaccination rates, and have helped pave the way for expanding the scope of practice for pharmacists.

Queensland pharmacist immunisation pilot phase 1 pharmacist vaccination - Influenza final report

The results of the pilot demonstrated that a pharmacist delivered vaccinations services is feasible in community pharmacy and is safe and effective. The accessibility of the pharmacist across the influenza season provided the opportunity for more people to be vaccinated, particularly those who had never received an influenza vaccine before. Patient satisfaction was extremely high with nearly all patients happy to recommend the service and to return again next year. Factors critical to the success of the service were: 1. Appropriate facilities 2. Competent pharmacists 3. Practice and decision support tools 4. In-­‐store implementation support We demonstrated in the pilot that vaccination recipients preferred a private consultation area. As the level of privacy afforded to the patients increased (private room vs. booth), so did the numbers of patients vaccinated. We would therefore recommend that the minimum standard of a private consultation room or closed-­‐in booth, with adequate space for multiple chairs and a work / consultation table be considered for provision of any vaccination services. The booth or consultation room should be used exclusively for delivering patient services and should not contain other general office equipment, nor be used as storage for stock. The pilot also demonstrated that a pharmacist-­‐specific training program produced competent and confident vaccinators and that this program can be used to retrofit the profession with these skills. As vaccination is within the scope of pharmacist practice as defined by the Pharmacy Board of Australia, there is potential for the universities to train their undergraduates with this skill and provide a pharmacist vaccination workforce in the near future. It is therefore essential to explore appropriate changes to the legislation to facilitate pharmacists’ practice in this area. Given the level of pharmacology and medicines knowledge of pharmacists, combined with their new competency of providing vaccinations through administering injections, it is reasonable to explore additional vaccines that pharmacists could administer in the community setting. At the time of writing, QPIP has already expanded into Phase 2, to explore pharmacists vaccinating for whooping cough and measles. Looking at the international experience of pharmacist delivered vaccination, we would recommend considering expansion to other vaccinations in the future including travel vaccinations, HPV and selected vaccinations to those under the age of 18 years. Overall the results of the QPIP implementation have demonstrated that an appropriately trained pharmacist can deliver safely and effectively influenza vaccinations to adult patients in the community. The QPIP showed the value that the accessibility of pharmacists brings to public health outcomes through improved access to vaccinations and the ability to increase immunisation rates in the general population. Over time with the expansion of pharmacist vaccination services this will help to achieve more effective herd immunity for some of the many diseases which currently have suboptimal immunisation rates.

Pharmacotherapy optimization in older patients by a structured clinical pharmacist assessment and intervention

Introduction: Older individuals are particularly vulnerable to potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), drug related problems (DRPs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). A number of different interventions have been proposed to address these issues. However to-date there is a paucity of well-designed trials examining the impact of such interventions. Therefore the aims of this work were to: (i) establish a baseline PIP prevalence both nationally and internationally using the STOPP, Beers and PRISCUS criteria, (ii) identify the most comprehensive method of assessing PIP in older individuals, (iii) develop a structured pharmacist intervention supported by a computer decisions support system (CDSS) and (iv) examine the impact of this intervention on prescribing and incidence of ADRs. Results: This work identified high rates of PIP across all three healthcare settings in Ireland, 84.7% in the long term care, 70.7% in secondary care and 43.3% in primary care being reported. This work identified that for a comprehensive assessment of prescribing to be undertaken, an amalgamation of all three criteria should be deployed simultaneously. High prevalences of DRPs and PIP in older hospitalised individuals were identified. With 82.0% and 76.3% of patients reported to have at least one DRP or PIP instance respectively. The structured pharmacist intervention demonstrated a positive impact on prescribing, with a significant reduction MAI scores being reported. It also resulted in the intervention patients’ having a reduced risk of experiencing an ADR when compared to the control patients (absolute risk reduction of 6.8 (95% CI 1.5% - 12.3%)) and the number needed to treat = 15 (95% CI 8 - 68). However the intervention was found to have no significant effect on length of stay or mortality rate. Conclusion: This work shows that PIP is highly prevalent in older individuals across three healthcare settings in Ireland. This work also demonstrates that a structured pharmacist intervention support by a dedicated CDSS can significantly improve the appropriateness of prescribing and reduce the incidence of ADRs in older acutely ill hospitalised individuals.