Rachel J Hobson1, Graham J Sewell. 1. Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Bath and Swindon and Marlborough NHS Trust, England, United Kingdom. r.j.hobson@bath.ac.uk
Abstract
PURPOSE: The implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists within primary care trusts (PCTs) and secondary care trusts (SCTs) in England was studied. METHODS: A survey was developed and sent to pharmacists in PCTs and SCTs in England who would oversee the implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists. RESULTS: The response rate was 68% for both surveys. The majority of SCTs and PCTs intended to implement supplementary prescribing by pharmacists by the end of 2005 (57% and 56%, respectively). The majority of SCT respondents did not believe that it would be more difficult to recruit designated medical practitioners to supervise supplementary prescribing training for pharmacists as opposed to nurses (67%, n = 43), whereas the largest group of PCT pharmacists believed it would be (47%, n = 86). Within secondary care, the clinical areas in which pharmacists were intending to work as supplementary prescribers were those where they already had established roles. Within primary care, the main clinical areas for pharmacists were influenced by those areas in the new General Medical Services contract Quality and Outcomes Framework for general practitioners. CONCLUSION: A survey investigating the implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists in England found that there were significantly more barriers to its establishment within primary care than secondary care settings. Within primary care, supplementary prescribing is being implemented to develop new services. Within secondary care, the supplementary prescribing model is more often used to legitimize services already being provided.
PURPOSE: The implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists within primary care trusts (PCTs) and secondary care trusts (SCTs) in England was studied. METHODS: A survey was developed and sent to pharmacists in PCTs and SCTs in England who would oversee the implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists. RESULTS: The response rate was 68% for both surveys. The majority of SCTs and PCTs intended to implement supplementary prescribing by pharmacists by the end of 2005 (57% and 56%, respectively). The majority of SCT respondents did not believe that it would be more difficult to recruit designated medical practitioners to supervise supplementary prescribing training for pharmacists as opposed to nurses (67%, n = 43), whereas the largest group of PCT pharmacists believed it would be (47%, n = 86). Within secondary care, the clinical areas in which pharmacists were intending to work as supplementary prescribers were those where they already had established roles. Within primary care, the main clinical areas for pharmacists were influenced by those areas in the new General Medical Services contract Quality and Outcomes Framework for general practitioners. CONCLUSION: A survey investigating the implementation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists in England found that there were significantly more barriers to its establishment within primary care than secondary care settings. Within primary care, supplementary prescribing is being implemented to develop new services. Within secondary care, the supplementary prescribing model is more often used to legitimize services already being provided.
Authors: Johnson George; Jennifer Cleland; Christine M Bond; Dorothy J McCaig; I T Scott Cunningham; H Lesley Diack; Derek C Stewart Journal: Pharm World Sci Date: 2007-10-23
Authors: Derek C Stewart; Johnson George; Christine M Bond; I T Scott Cunningham; H Lesley Diack; Dorothy J McCaig Journal: Pharm World Sci Date: 2008-09-12