Afonso Miguel Cavaco1, Anette Aaland Krookas. 1. iMed.UL, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Lisbon, Av. Prof. Gama Pinto, 1649-003, Lisbon, Portugal, acavaco@ff.ul.pt.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One key indicator of the quality of health practitioners-patient interaction is the encounters' duration. Automation have been presented as beneficial to pharmacy staff work with patients and thus with a potential impact on pharmacists' and technicians' job satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: To compare the interaction length between pharmacy staff and patients, as well as their job satisfaction, in community pharmacies with and without automation. SETTING: Portuguese community pharmacies with and without automation. METHODS: This cross-sectional study followed a quasi-experimental design, divided in two phases. In the first, paired community pharmacies with and without automation were purposively selected for a non-participant overt observation. The second phase comprised a job satisfaction questionnaire of both pharmacists and technical staff. Practitioners and patients demographic and interactional data, as well as job satisfaction, were statistically compared across automation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Interaction length and job satisfaction. RESULTS: Sixty-eight practitioners from 10 automated and non-automated pharmacies produced 721 registered interaction episodes. Automation had no significant influence in interaction duration, controlling for gender and professional categories, being significantly longer with older patients (p = 0.017). On average, staff working at the pharmacy counter had 45 % of free time from direct patient contact. The mean overall satisfaction in this sample was 5.52 (SD = 0.98) out of a maximum score of seven, with no significant differences with automation as well as between professional categories, only with a significant lower job satisfaction for younger pharmacists. CONCLUSION: As with previous studies in other settings, duration of the interactions was not influenced by pharmacy automation, as well as practitioners' job satisfaction, while practitioners' time constrains seem to be a subjective perception.
BACKGROUND: One key indicator of the quality of health practitioners-patient interaction is the encounters' duration. Automation have been presented as beneficial to pharmacy staff work with patients and thus with a potential impact on pharmacists' and technicians' job satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: To compare the interaction length between pharmacy staff and patients, as well as their job satisfaction, in community pharmacies with and without automation. SETTING: Portuguese community pharmacies with and without automation. METHODS: This cross-sectional study followed a quasi-experimental design, divided in two phases. In the first, paired community pharmacies with and without automation were purposively selected for a non-participant overt observation. The second phase comprised a job satisfaction questionnaire of both pharmacists and technical staff. Practitioners and patients demographic and interactional data, as well as job satisfaction, were statistically compared across automation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Interaction length and job satisfaction. RESULTS: Sixty-eight practitioners from 10 automated and non-automated pharmacies produced 721 registered interaction episodes. Automation had no significant influence in interaction duration, controlling for gender and professional categories, being significantly longer with older patients (p = 0.017). On average, staff working at the pharmacy counter had 45 % of free time from direct patient contact. The mean overall satisfaction in this sample was 5.52 (SD = 0.98) out of a maximum score of seven, with no significant differences with automation as well as between professional categories, only with a significant lower job satisfaction for younger pharmacists. CONCLUSION: As with previous studies in other settings, duration of the interactions was not influenced by pharmacy automation, as well as practitioners' job satisfaction, while practitioners' time constrains seem to be a subjective perception.
Authors: Kristin E Walsh; Michelle Anne Chui; Mara A Kieser; Staci M Williams; Susan L Sutter; John G Sutter Journal: J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) Date: 2011 Sep-Oct
Authors: Dima M Qato; G Caleb Alexander; Rena M Conti; Michael Johnson; Phil Schumm; Stacy Tessler Lindau Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-12-24 Impact factor: 56.272