Michela Tinelli1, Alison Blenkinsopp2, Sue Latter3, Alesha Smith3, Stephen R Chapman4. 1. Centre of Academic Primary Care and Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. 2. Department of Medicines Management, Keele School of Pharmacy, University of Keele, Keele, UK. 3. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Keele, UK. 4. Keele's School of Pharmacy, University of Keele, Keele, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, nurses and pharmacists who have undertaken additional post-registration training can prescribe medicines for any medical condition within their competence (non-medical prescribers, NMPs), but little is known about patients' experiences and perceptions of this service. OBJECTIVE: to obtain feedback from primary care patients on the impact of prescribing by nurse independent prescribers (NIPs) and pharmacist independent prescribers (PIPs) on experiences of the consultation, the patient-professional relationship, access to medicines, quality of care, choice, knowledge, patient-reported adherence and control of their condition. DESIGN: Two cross-sectional postal surveys. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients prescribed for by either NIPs or PIPs in six general practices from different regions in England. RESULTS: 30% of patients responded (294/975; 149/525 NIPs; 145/450 PIPs). Most said they were very satisfied with their last visit (94%; 87%), they were told as much as they wanted to know about their medicines (88%; 80%), and felt the independent prescriber really understood their point of view (87%; 75%). They had a good relationship with (89%; 79%) and confidence in (84%; 77%) their NMP. When comparing NMP and doctor prescribing services, most patients reported no difference in their experience of care provided, including access to it, control of condition, support for adherence, quality and safety of care. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Patients had positive perceptions and experience from their NMP visit. NMPs were well received, and patients' responses indicated the establishment of rapport. They did not express a strong preference for care provided by either their non-medical or medical prescriber.
BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, nurses and pharmacists who have undertaken additional post-registration training can prescribe medicines for any medical condition within their competence (non-medical prescribers, NMPs), but little is known about patients' experiences and perceptions of this service. OBJECTIVE: to obtain feedback from primary care patients on the impact of prescribing by nurse independent prescribers (NIPs) and pharmacist independent prescribers (PIPs) on experiences of the consultation, the patient-professional relationship, access to medicines, quality of care, choice, knowledge, patient-reported adherence and control of their condition. DESIGN: Two cross-sectional postal surveys. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients prescribed for by either NIPs or PIPs in six general practices from different regions in England. RESULTS: 30% of patients responded (294/975; 149/525 NIPs; 145/450 PIPs). Most said they were very satisfied with their last visit (94%; 87%), they were told as much as they wanted to know about their medicines (88%; 80%), and felt the independent prescriber really understood their point of view (87%; 75%). They had a good relationship with (89%; 79%) and confidence in (84%; 77%) their NMP. When comparing NMP and doctor prescribing services, most patients reported no difference in their experience of care provided, including access to it, control of condition, support for adherence, quality and safety of care. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:Patients had positive perceptions and experience from their NMP visit. NMPs were well received, and patients' responses indicated the establishment of rapport. They did not express a strong preference for care provided by either their non-medical or medical prescriber.
Authors: Sue Latter; Andrew Sibley; Timothy C Skinner; Sue Cradock; Katarzyna M Zinken; Marie-Therese Lussier; Claude Richard; Denis Roberge Journal: Int J Nurs Stud Date: 2010-03-07 Impact factor: 5.837
Authors: Derek C Stewart; Katie Maclure; Christine M Bond; Scott Cunningham; Lesley Diack; Johnson George; Dorothy J McCaig Journal: Int J Pharm Pract Date: 2011-06-09
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
Authors: John Campbell; Patten Smith; Sonja Nissen; Peter Bower; Marc Elliott; Martin Roland Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2009-08-22 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Fiona Stewart; Gail Caldwell; Kirstin Cassells; Jonathan Burton; Anne Watson Journal: Prim Health Care Res Dev Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 1.458
Authors: Michele Peters; Helen Crocker; Sarah Dummett; Crispin Jenkinson; Helen Doll; Ray Fitzpatrick Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2014-08-12 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Havan Truong; Miranda E Kroehl; Carmen Lewis; Robin Pettigrew; Marialice Bennett; Joseph J Saseen; Katy E Trinkley Journal: SAGE Open Med Date: 2017-06-13