The aim of this paper is to investigate interprofessional collaboration between general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists involved in the delivery of enhanced pharmacy services under the local pharmaceutical services (LPS) contract in England. Previous research suggests that a number of interprofessional barriers exist between community pharmacists and GPs which hinders the integration of community pharmacists into the primary health care team (PHCT). One of the aims of the LPS contract, introduced in England in 2002 as an alternative to national contractual arrangements, was to enable pharmacists to work more closely with other health care professionals. A two-stage survey was distributed to all pharmacists involved in the first wave of LPS and in-depth interviews undertaken with pharmacists and GPs at six of the LPS sites. Overall the level to which the LPS pharmacists felt integrated into the PHCT did not substantially increase with the introduction of LPS, although co-location was reported to have facilitated integration. New relationships were formed with GPs and existing ones strengthened. A good existing working relationship with GPs was found to be an important factor in the successful operation of the pilots as many were dependent on GPs for patient referrals. The findings suggest that establishing interprofessional collaboration between GPs and pharmacists is a piecemeal process, with a reliance on goodwill and trust-based relationships.
Consideration needs to be given to the appointment of curriculum leads for patient safety who should be encouraged to work strategically across disciplines and topic areas; development of stronger links with organisational systems to promote student engagement with organisation-based patient safety practice; and role models should help students to make connections between theoretical considerations and routine clinical care.
BackgroundTo address the growing GP workforce crisis, NHS England (NHSE) launched the Clinical Pharmacists in General Practice scheme in 2015. The NHSE scheme promotes a newer, patient-facing role for pharmacists and, currently, there is little insight into the role and activities undertaken. All scheme pharmacists are enrolled on the general practice pharmacist training pathway (GPPTP).AimTo investigate the role evolution and integration of clinical pharmacists in general practice in England.Design and settingLongitudinal survey of all phase 1 GPPTP registrants working in general practice at start of (T1) and 6 months into (T2) training.MethodAn online longitudinal survey was administered to all phase 1 GPPTP registrants (n = 457) at T1 and T2, measuring their perceived knowledge, skill, and confidence, activities performed, and perceptions of practice integration, environment, and support. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests were conducted.ResultsResponse rates were 46% (T1) and 52% (T2); 158 participants completed both questionnaires. Perceived knowledge, skill, and confidence levels increased significantly from T1 to T2 for all areas, except for managing acute or common illness. Scope of practice increased significantly, particularly in patient-facing activities. Sharing office space with administrative staff was common and 13% of participants reported having no designated work area. Perceived integration at T2 was fairly high (median = 5 on a scale of 1–7) but GP clinical support was ‘too little’ according to one-third of participants.ConclusionFindings show not only patient-facing role expansion, but also practice environment and support issues. Pharmacists may appreciate more GP time invested in their development. Practices need to be realistic about this support and not expect an immediate reduction in workload.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.