OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY: To describe community pharmacists' early experiences, views and attitudes with over-the-counter orlistat, 9 months post legal re-classification from November 2009 to January 2010. SETTING: 13,200 (81%) randomly selected registered community pharmacies across Great Britain out of a potential 16,200. METHODS: A cross-sectional postal questionnaire survey of the main pharmacist with greatest responsibility for over-the-counter (OTC) supply. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pharmacists' early experiences, views and attitudes of orlistat supply, demographic data of respondents and personal opinions with the supply of orlistat. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 32.4% (n = 4,026) of pharmacists surveyed. Just over half (51.9%, n = 2,091) reported no sales of orlistat in the previous 4 weeks with only 5.1% (n = 203) reporting frequent (5.1%) or very frequent supply in the same time frame. Two thirds (66.5%, n = 2,676) agreed or strongly agreed that the sale of orlistat was a good opportunity to extend their role as a healthcare professional and 92% (n = 3,712) felt confident in their ability to supply this product. Over half (57.9%, n = 2,334) admitted that customers frequently complained about the cost of the product and 47.8% (n = 1,926) agreed that customers could misuse the product. CONCLUSION: Despite community pharmacists welcoming orlistat re-classification to increase medicines availability as an opportunity to extend their healthcare professional role there were concerns about poor public uptake, high cost and the potential for misuse. Exploratory studies collecting the views and experiences of the general public about the access and provision of weight management services through community pharmacies are warranted.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY: To describe community pharmacists' early experiences, views and attitudes with over-the-counter orlistat, 9 months post legal re-classification from November 2009 to January 2010. SETTING: 13,200 (81%) randomly selected registered community pharmacies across Great Britain out of a potential 16,200. METHODS: A cross-sectional postal questionnaire survey of the main pharmacist with greatest responsibility for over-the-counter (OTC) supply. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pharmacists' early experiences, views and attitudes of orlistat supply, demographic data of respondents and personal opinions with the supply of orlistat. RESULTS: Questionnaires were returned by 32.4% (n = 4,026) of pharmacists surveyed. Just over half (51.9%, n = 2,091) reported no sales of orlistat in the previous 4 weeks with only 5.1% (n = 203) reporting frequent (5.1%) or very frequent supply in the same time frame. Two thirds (66.5%, n = 2,676) agreed or strongly agreed that the sale of orlistat was a good opportunity to extend their role as a healthcare professional and 92% (n = 3,712) felt confident in their ability to supply this product. Over half (57.9%, n = 2,334) admitted that customers frequently complained about the cost of the product and 47.8% (n = 1,926) agreed that customers could misuse the product. CONCLUSION: Despite community pharmacists welcoming orlistat re-classification to increase medicines availability as an opportunity to extend their healthcare professional role there were concerns about poor public uptake, high cost and the potential for misuse. Exploratory studies collecting the views and experiences of the general public about the access and provision of weight management services through community pharmacies are warranted.
Authors: E McColl; A Jacoby; L Thomas; J Soutter; C Bamford; N Steen; R Thomas; E Harvey; A Garratt; J Bond Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2001 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Theodosios D Filippatos; Christos S Derdemezis; Irene F Gazi; Eleni S Nakou; Dimitri P Mikhailidis; Moses S Elisaf Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2008 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Thomas A Wadden; Robert I Berkowitz; Leslie G Womble; David B Sarwer; Suzanne Phelan; Robert K Cato; Louise A Hesson; Suzette Y Osei; Rosalind Kaplan; Albert J Stunkard Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Derek Stewart; Dai John; Scott Cunningham; Dorothy McCaig; Denise Hansford Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: M H Davidson; J Hauptman; M DiGirolamo; J P Foreyt; C H Halsted; D Heber; D C Heimburger; C P Lucas; D C Robbins; J Chung; S B Heymsfield Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-01-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Pauline L Douglas; Helen McCarthy; Lynn E McCotter; Siobhan Gallen; Stephen McClean; Alison M Gallagher; Sumantra Ray Journal: Pharmacy (Basel) Date: 2019-03-05