Understanding the impact of a new pharmacy sore throat test and treat service on patient experience: A survey study

Mantzourani, Efi; Cannings‐John, Rebecca; Evans, Andrew; Ahmed, Haroon; Meudell, Alan; Hill, I. D.; Williams, Emma; Way, Cheryl; Hood, Kerenza; Legay, Benjamin; Houldcroft, Laura; Deslandes, Rhian

doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.07.034

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The LISTEN UP pilot study has demonstrated very high levels of patient satisfaction and intention to return to the pharmacy for ear complaints in the future. This satisfaction level aligns with the sore throat study conducted in the United Kingdom, which may indicate the beginning of a shift in consumer health-seeking behaviour towards pharmacy-based services [ 25 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

“…Patients also completed a satisfaction survey and received a follow up phone call at seven days, which was transcribed and analysed to explore outcomes including prescribed medications and referrals [ 24 ]. The LISTEN UP satisfaction survey was based on a survey for a sore throat study in the UK, where pharmacists are delivering consultations including clinical scoring and point-of-care testing [ 25 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developing an Ear Health Intervention for Rural Community Pharmacy: Application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model

Taylor

Cairns

Glass

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unaddressed hearing loss affects an estimated 466 million people worldwide, costing over $750 billion globally, with rural communities being particularly disadvantaged, due to the greater inequity in access to healthcare services. This mixed-methods study aimed to use the PRECEDE-PROCEED model to develop and pilot a rural community pharmacy-based ear health service, LISTEN UP (Locally Integrated Screening and Testing Ear aNd aUral Program). The PRECEDE process involved an assessment of the predisposing, reinforcing and enabling constructs to support practice change through a scoping review, stakeholder surveys and interviews and consultation with governing bodies and regulatory authorities. The PROCEED segment structured the evaluation of the service pilot and informed planned implementation, process, impact and outcome evaluation. The pilot study conducted in February 2021 included 20 participants, with the most common ear complaints presented being pain, pressure or blockage. All these participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the service, would recommend the service to others and would attend the pharmacy first before seeing a GP for future ear complaints. The PRECEDE-PROCEED model provides a comprehensive model to guide the design of the LISTEN UP program, an innovative model, expanding services offered by rural community pharmacies, with preliminary results demonstrating high consumer satisfaction.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an Ear Health Intervention for Rural Community Pharmacy: Application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model

Taylor

Cairns

Glass

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to our study CPs, patients have a lack of awareness about CPs' extended roles/services including communication with GPs to optimise antimicrobial therapy. According to a UK study [33], the awareness and attitudes of patients were influenced by how frequently patients used the services (such as sore throat test by CPs) and felt benefited from using the services. Patients' use of, and access to, new pharmacy services (e.g., pointof-care tests followed by appropriate referral to GPs) depends on the professionalism of the team of CPs and how strong the GP-CP collaboration is as well [34].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Divergent and Convergent Attitudes and Views of General Practitioners and Community Pharmacists to Collaboratively Implement Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Australia: A Nationwide Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Setting up an interprofessional team for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) to improve the quality and safety of antimicrobial use in primary care is essential but challenging. This study aimed to investigate the convergent and divergent attitudes and views of general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs) about AMS implementation and their perceived challenges of collaboration to design a GP–pharmacist collaborative AMS (GPPAS) model. Nationwide surveys of GPs and CPs across Australia were conducted January-October 2019. Chi square statistics and a theoretical framework were used for comparative analyses of quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. In total, 999 participants responded to the surveys with 15.4% (n = 386) response rates for GPs and 30.7% (n = 613) for CPs. GPs and CPs were aware about AMS however their interprofessional perceptions varied to the benefits of AMS programs. CPs indicated that they would need AMS training; significantly higher than GPs (GP vs. CP; 46.4% vs. 76.5%; p < 0.0001). GPs’ use of the Therapeutic Guideline Antibiotic was much higher than CPs (83.2% vs. 45.5%; p < 0.0001). No interprofessional difference was found in the very-limited use of patient information leaflets (p < 0.1162) and point-of-care tests (p < 0.7848). While CPs were more willing (p < 0.0001) to collaborate with GPs, both groups were convergent in views that policies that support GP–CP collaboration are needed to implement GPPAS strategies. GP–pharmacist collaborative group meetings (54.9% vs. 82.5%) and antimicrobial audit (46.1% vs. 86.5%) models were inter-professionally supported to optimise antimicrobial therapy, but an attitudinal divergence was significant (p < 0.001). The challenges towards GP–CP collaboration in AMS were identified by both at personal, logistical and organisational environment level. There are opportunities for GP–CP collaboration to improve AMS in Australian primary care. However, strengthening GP–pharmacy collaborative system structure and practice agreements is a priority to improve interprofessional trust, competencies, and communications for AMS and to establish a GPPAS model in future.

show abstract

“…NHS England is encouraging POCTs in community pharmacies; and tests to support management of acute infections may be a useful addition here especially if POCTs are included in service contracts to guide use. [36][37][38] POCTs in locality hubs, which specialise in the management of acute infections, is another possibility. Longerterm, there may be potential to have POCTs in the home to support patient self-management.…”

Section: Implications For Research And/or Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing antibiotic stewardship in high-prescribing English general practices: a mixed-methods study

Tonkin‐Crine

McLeod²,

Borek

et al. 2022

Br J Gen Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Trials have identified antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) strategies that effectively reduce antibiotic use in primary care. However, many are not commonly used in England. We co-developed an implementation intervention to improve use of three AMS strategies; enhanced communication strategies, delayed prescriptions, and point-of-care C-Reactive Protein testing (POC-CRPT). Aim: To investigate the use of the intervention in high-prescribing practices and its effect on antibiotic prescribing. Design and setting: Nine high-prescribing practices had access to the intervention for 12 months from November 2019. This was primarily delivered remotely via a website with practices required to identify an ‘Antibiotic Champion’. Methods: We compared routinely collected prescribing data between intervention and 45 matched control practices using a difference-in-differences analysis. Intervention use was assessed through monitoring. Surveys and interviews were conducted with professionals to capture experiences of using the intervention. Results: There was no evidence that the intervention affected prescribing. Engagement with intervention materials differed substantially between practices and depended on individual Champions’ preconceptions of strategies and opportunity to conduct implementation tasks. Champions in five practices initiated changes to encourage use of at least one AMS strategy, mostly POC-CRPT; one practice chose all three. POC-CRPT was used more when allocated to one person. Conclusions: Clinicians need detailed information on exactly how to adopt AMS strategies. Strategies may be used more when allocated to one or two individuals. Remote, one-sided provision of AMS strategies is unlikely to change prescribing; initial clinician engagement and understanding needs to be monitored to avoid misunderstanding and sub-optimal use.

show abstract

Understanding the impact of a new pharmacy sore throat test and treat service on patient experience: A survey study

Cited by 13 publications

References 17 publications

Developing an Ear Health Intervention for Rural Community Pharmacy: Application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model

Developing an Ear Health Intervention for Rural Community Pharmacy: Application of the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model

Divergent and Convergent Attitudes and Views of General Practitioners and Community Pharmacists to Collaboratively Implement Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs in Australia: A Nationwide Study

Implementing antibiotic stewardship in high-prescribing English general practices: a mixed-methods study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About