No abstract

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.

The relatively high number of identities may reflect some degree of role ambiguity and lack of clear direction and ownership of what makes pharmacists unique, but also suggests a flexible view of their role.

No abstract

The present paper explores how charges for medicines incurred by patients influence their decisions for managing acute or chronic conditions, and whether prescription cost and affordability issues are discussed in the general practitioner (GP)-patient encounter. People suffering from dyspepsia, hay fever or hypertension, or those taking hormone replacement therapy, were recruited through three community pharmacies in the North-west of England. Six focus groups were conducted with a total of 31 participants, the majority of whom were non-exempt from prescription charges. The management behaviour of those participants who had to pay for their prescriptions, particularly those from less-affluent or deprived backgrounds, was influenced by cost. However, cost was not the overriding influence, with other factors, such as symptom or disease severity, effectiveness, or necessity of treatment, playing a more important part in participants' management decisions. Cost as an issue was reflected in the various strategies used by participants to reduce medication cost, such as not having some prescribed items dispensed, taking a smaller dose or buying a cheaper over-the-counter product. Despite the use of numerous strategies, participants did not talk to their GPs about issues of cost and affordability. Participants felt that paying for prescriptions was their problem. There was a belief that discussing cost issues could jeopardise the doctor-patient relationship. Although not the dominant factor, medication cost nevertheless influenced participants when deciding how to manage their condition. Awareness of the existence of prepayment certificates, which can be bought by patients who require regular medication, was low, and this should be addressed through improved information/dissemination. Despite the high level of prescription items exempt, the current level of the prescription charge is still a barrier to obtaining prescription medicines under the National Health Service to those on lower incomes.