OBJECTIVES: Assess the impact of pharmacy technician-supported point-of-care testing (POCT), including sample collection, on the number of cholesterol screenings performed in a community pharmacy setting. Secondary objectives include assessment of provider perceptions and patient satisfaction of POCT when executed by a technician. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Thirty-two community pharmacies in 1 regional division of a large community pharmacy chain in Tennessee; 16 participated in a certified pharmacy technician (CPhT) training program, and 16 did not. PRACTICE INNOVATION: CPhTs supported POCT service delivery limited to the nonprofessional, technical tasks (e.g., sample collection, quality assurance). EVALUATION: The primary objective was evaluated by comparing the total number of screenings for control and intervention sites. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. Both secondary measures were assessed via anonymous, Likert-type scale questionnaires. RESULTS: Intervention pharmacies performed 358 screenings, whereas control pharmacies performed 255 screenings (16.8% difference). The patient perception survey found that 94% (149 of 159) of those who received screening with CPhT involvement agreed or strongly agreed that the service was valuable, and 70% (111 of 159) reported that they are likely to follow up with their primary care providers to discuss the results. Furthermore, most patients were in agreement that they were overall satisfied with the screening services provided by the CPhT (94%, 149 of 159), and the CPhT was professional while performing the screening (95%, 151 of 159). The provider perceptions survey on service implementation found that most pharmacy personnel agreed or strongly agreed that CPhTs performing POCT was feasible, appropriate, and acceptable. CONCLUSION: This study provided preliminary data that technician-supported POCT may positively impact the number of screenings provided. In addition, provider perceptions were positive, and patients felt satisfied with the studied technician model.
OBJECTIVES: Assess the impact of pharmacy technician-supported point-of-care testing (POCT), including sample collection, on the number of cholesterol screenings performed in a community pharmacy setting. Secondary objectives include assessment of provider perceptions and patient satisfaction of POCT when executed by a technician. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Thirty-two community pharmacies in 1 regional division of a large community pharmacy chain in Tennessee; 16 participated in a certified pharmacy technician (CPhT) training program, and 16 did not. PRACTICE INNOVATION: CPhTs supported POCT service delivery limited to the nonprofessional, technical tasks (e.g., sample collection, quality assurance). EVALUATION: The primary objective was evaluated by comparing the total number of screenings for control and intervention sites. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used. Both secondary measures were assessed via anonymous, Likert-type scale questionnaires. RESULTS: Intervention pharmacies performed 358 screenings, whereas control pharmacies performed 255 screenings (16.8% difference). The patient perception survey found that 94% (149 of 159) of those who received screening with CPhT involvement agreed or strongly agreed that the service was valuable, and 70% (111 of 159) reported that they are likely to follow up with their primary care providers to discuss the results. Furthermore, most patients were in agreement that they were overall satisfied with the screening services provided by the CPhT (94%, 149 of 159), and the CPhT was professional while performing the screening (95%, 151 of 159). The provider perceptions survey on service implementation found that most pharmacy personnel agreed or strongly agreed that CPhTs performing POCT was feasible, appropriate, and acceptable. CONCLUSION: This study provided preliminary data that technician-supported POCT may positively impact the number of screenings provided. In addition, provider perceptions were positive, and patients felt satisfied with the studied technician model.
Authors: Sarah Pope; Hunter Hill; Lindsey Cardosi; Lindsey Henson; Mike Wasson; Sara Stallworth; Kim Ward; Shane P Desselle; Kenneth C Hohmeier Journal: Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm Date: 2021-06-10