No abstract

No abstract

Background: To help alleviate the global pressure on primary care, there has been an increase in the number of clinical pharmacists within primary care. Educational resources are necessary to support this workforce and their development within this role. An educational resource package was developed in Scotland to support the General Practice Clinical Pharmacists (GPCPs), containing a hard copy Competency and Capability Framework (CCF), an online platform (TURAS) and both clinical and educational supervisors in 2016. Objective: To examine the implementation of a competency-based educational resource package through the exploration of pharmacists’ perceptions of its adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. Methods: Participants were GPCPs who had been part of a national training event between 2016 and 2018. The participants were given the opportunity to complete an online questionnaire or a semi-structured telephone interview. Both data collection tools were based on Proctor’s model of implementation outcomes: adoption, acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility. Areas covered included GPCPs’ perceptions and level of adoption of the educational resource package developed to support them in their role. Results: Of a potential 164 participants, 52 (31.7%) completed the questionnaire and 12 (7.3%) completed the interview. GPCPs indicated widespread adoption and were accepting of the resources; however, it was suggested that its value was undermined, as it was not associated with a qualification. The appropriateness and feasibility of the resources depended on GPCPs’ individual situation (including current role, previous job experience, time available, support received from peers and supervisors, and perceptions of resources available). Conclusions: The suitability of the CCF was evidenced by participants’ adoption and acceptance of the resource, indicating the necessity of a competence-based framework to support the GPCPs’ role. However, its suitability was hindered in terms of varied perceptions of appropriateness and feasibility. Despite the limited sample size, the results indicate that the value of these resources should be promoted across primary care; nevertheless further facilitation is required to allow GPCPs to fully engage with the resources.

Due to work load pressures in primary care, increasing efforts are being made internationally to implement pharmacists working alongside general practitioners. While there is wide interest in the contributions pharmacists can make within primary care, there is limited research which explores the competencies pharmacists need to safely and effectively provide care in this arena. Therefore, a modified eDelphi study was conducted between July 2019 and January 2020 among pharmacists working in General Practice in Scotland in order to (a) generate a list of competencies required to undertake pharmacotherapy tasks within General Practice using content analysis; and (b) establish consensus regarding the importance of these competencies using a rating scale ranging from 1 ("not important") to 10 ("very important"). A framework of competencies was developed, containing eight competency categories with a total of 31 individual competency items. Overall, study participants considered all eight competency categories as being important, with a mode of 10 and a median >8; agreement among participants was high, with the majority of individual competency items rated 8 or above by more than 75% of participants. There was, however, variation in responses with regards to specific tasks such as medicines reconciliation and medication compliance reviews. Findings indicate that the GP setting requires a broad set of competencies-covering areas including the use of IT systems; clinical knowledge; and communicating with patients and other healthcare professionals. This implies that further emphasis on clinical and consultation skills should be added to training programmes aimed at GP pharmacists; furthermore, ongoing support is also needed with regards to generic skills such as the use of IT systems, documentation, and general procedures and processes within primary care, some of which might need to be tailored to the specific practice context.

Introduction There is growing pressure on primary care, which has resulted in an increased number of clinical pharmacists working within the setting. To help support this growing workforce in their role and with their development, several countries have created educational resources. Within Scotland, an educational resource package was created for pharmacists working in General Practice, containing a Competency and Capability Framework, an online platform and educational and clinical supervision. The implementation of these resources in Scotland has not been evaluated thus far, therefore it is unclear to what extent they may support and facilitate pharmacists in their professional role. Aim The aim of this project was to assess pharmacists’ perceptions of the educational resource package available to General Practice pharmacists in Scotland. Methods A mixed-methods study comprising an online questionnaire and semi-structured telephone interviews was undertaken between July and October 2019. The questionnaire sought to provide a more representative overview, with the interviews designed to gain an in-depth understanding, to support the development of recommendations to improve the educational resource package. A previously validated, online questionnaire (1) was used to explore pharmacists’ view on the adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the educational resources based on Proctor’s model of implementation outcomes (2); similarly, the semi-structured telephone interviews explored pharmacists’ experiences with the resources, in addition to inquiring about its adoption, acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. The questionnaire included a Likert scale and free-text questions; quantitative responses were summarised, whereas the qualitative answers underwent a content analysis directed by Proctor’s implementation outcomes. The interview results were structured using the framework approach, with the data undergoing a thematic or summative content analysis. Results Overall, 52 pharmacists completed the questionnaire and 12 participated in the interviews. The results indicated widespread adoption and acceptance of the educational resource package. The level of acceptance was influenced by the perceived purpose of completing the resources, such as if they believed it provided development opportunities. Its appropriateness depended on the pharmacist’s individual situation since previous experiences and current job role differed. Additionally, several barriers complicated the feasibility of the resources, such as insufficient support and guidance. Conclusion The adoption and acceptance of the educational resource package for General Practice pharmacists in Scotland indicated its suitability for supporting their role; however, further facilitation would enhance their engagement with the resources, and potentially improve their perception of its appropriateness and feasibility. Despite the limited sample size, the study provided an in-depth understanding of general practice pharmacists perceptions of the educational recourse package, based on an established model. References (1) Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38(2):65-76. (2) Weiner BJ, Lewis CC, Stanick C, et al. Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implement Sci. 2017; 12(1): 108.