Renukha Sellappans1, Chirk Jenn Ng1, Pauline Siew Mei Lai2. 1. Department of Primary Care Medicine, University Malaya Primary Care Research Group (UMPCRG), Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 2. Department of Primary Care Medicine, University Malaya Primary Care Research Group (UMPCRG), Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. plai@ummc.edu.my.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Establishing a collaborative working relationship between doctors and pharmacists is essential for the effective provision of pharmaceutical care. The Physician-Pharmacist Collaborative Index (PPCI) was developed to assess the professional exchanges between doctors and pharmacists. Two versions of the PPCI was developed: one for physicians and one for pharmacists. However, these instruments have not been validated in Malaysia. OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity and reliability of the PPCI for physicians in Malaysia. SETTING: An urban tertiary hospital in Malaysia. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from June to August 2014. Doctors were grouped as either a "collaborator" or a "non-collaborator". Collaborators were doctors who regularly worked with one particular clinical pharmacist in their ward, while non-collaborators were doctors who interacted with any random pharmacist who answered the general pharmacy telephone line whenever they required assistance on medication-related enquiries, as they did not have a clinical pharmacist in their ward. Collaborators were firstly identified by the clinical pharmacist he/she worked with, then invited to participate in this study through email, as it was difficult to locate and approach them personally. Non-collaborators were sampled conveniently by approaching them in person as these doctors could be easily sampled from any wards without a clinical pharmacist. The PPCI for physicians was administered at baseline and 2 weeks later. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Validity (face validity, factor analysis and discriminative validity) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) of the PPCI for physicians. RESULTS: A total of 116 doctors (18 collaborators and 98 non-collaborators) were recruited. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the PPCI for physicians was a 3-factor model. The correlation of the mean domain scores ranged from 0.711 to 0.787. "Collaborators" had significantly higher scores compared to "non-collaborators" (81.4 ± 10.1 vs. 69.3 ± 12.1, p < 0.001). The Cronbach alpha for the overall PPCI for physicians was 0.949, while the Cronbach alpha values for the individual domains ranged from 0.877 to 0.926. Kappa values at test-retest ranged from 0.553 to 0.752. CONCLUSION: The PPCI for physicians was a valid and reliable measure in determining doctors' views about collaborative working relationship with pharmacists, in Malaysia.
BACKGROUND: Establishing a collaborative working relationship between doctors and pharmacists is essential for the effective provision of pharmaceutical care. The Physician-Pharmacist Collaborative Index (PPCI) was developed to assess the professional exchanges between doctors and pharmacists. Two versions of the PPCI was developed: one for physicians and one for pharmacists. However, these instruments have not been validated in Malaysia. OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity and reliability of the PPCI for physicians in Malaysia. SETTING: An urban tertiary hospital in Malaysia. METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from June to August 2014. Doctors were grouped as either a "collaborator" or a "non-collaborator". Collaborators were doctors who regularly worked with one particular clinical pharmacist in their ward, while non-collaborators were doctors who interacted with any random pharmacist who answered the general pharmacy telephone line whenever they required assistance on medication-related enquiries, as they did not have a clinical pharmacist in their ward. Collaborators were firstly identified by the clinical pharmacist he/she worked with, then invited to participate in this study through email, as it was difficult to locate and approach them personally. Non-collaborators were sampled conveniently by approaching them in person as these doctors could be easily sampled from any wards without a clinical pharmacist. The PPCI for physicians was administered at baseline and 2 weeks later. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Validity (face validity, factor analysis and discriminative validity) and reliability (internal consistency and test-retest) of the PPCI for physicians. RESULTS: A total of 116 doctors (18 collaborators and 98 non-collaborators) were recruited. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that the PPCI for physicians was a 3-factor model. The correlation of the mean domain scores ranged from 0.711 to 0.787. "Collaborators" had significantly higher scores compared to "non-collaborators" (81.4 ± 10.1 vs. 69.3 ± 12.1, p < 0.001). The Cronbach alpha for the overall PPCI for physicians was 0.949, while the Cronbach alpha values for the individual domains ranged from 0.877 to 0.926. Kappa values at test-retest ranged from 0.553 to 0.752. CONCLUSION: The PPCI for physicians was a valid and reliable measure in determining doctors' views about collaborative working relationship with pharmacists, in Malaysia.
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Margie E Snyder; Alan J Zillich; Brian A Primack; Kristen R Rice; Melissa A Somma McGivney; Janice L Pringle; Randall B Smith Journal: Res Social Adm Pharm Date: 2010-02-11
Authors: Mark E Williams; Charles C Pulliam; Rebecca Hunter; Ted M Johnson; Justine E Owens; Jean Kincaid; Carol Porter; Gary Koch Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Marie A Chisholm; Laura L Mulloy; Muralidharan Jagadeesan; Bradley C Martin; Joseph T DiPiro Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2002 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: J T Hanlon; M Weinberger; G P Samsa; K E Schmader; K M Uttech; I K Lewis; P A Cowper; P B Landsman; H J Cohen; J R Feussner Journal: Am J Med Date: 1996-04 Impact factor: 4.965