General practitioners' views of pharmacists' current and potential contributions to medication review and prescribing in New Zealand

Ernieda Md Hatah, Rhiannon Braund, Stephen B. Duffull, June Tordoff

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Internationally, non-medical practitioners are increasingly involved in tasks traditionally undertaken by general practitioners (GPs), such as medication review and prescribing. This study aims to evaluate GPs' perceptions of pharmacists' contributions to those services. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two localities with GPs whose patients had and had not undergone a pharmacist-led adherence support Medication Use Review (MUR). GPs were asked their opinions of pharmacists' provision of MUR, clinical medication review and prescribing. Data were analysed thematically using NVivo 8 and grouped by strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) category. FINDINGS: Eighteen GPs were interviewed. GPs mentioned their own skills, training and knowledge of clinical conditions. These were considered GPs' major strengths. GPs' perceived weaknesses were their time constraints and heavy workloads. GPs thought pharmacists' strengths were their knowledge of pharmacology and having more time for in-depth medication review than GPs. Nevertheless, GPs felt pharmacist-led medication reviews might confuse patients, and increase GP workloads. GPs were concerned that pharmacist prescribing might include pharmacists making a diagnosis. This is not the proposed model for New Zealand. In general, GPs were more accepting of pharmacists providing medication reviews than of pharmacist prescribing, unless appropriate controls, close collaboration and co-location of services took place. CONCLUSION: GPs perceived their own skills were well suited to reviewing medication and prescribing, but thought pharmacists might also have strengths and skills in these areas. In future, GPs thought that working together with pharmacists in these services might be possible in a collaborative setting.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)223-233
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Primary Health Care
Volume5
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

New Zealand
Pharmacists
General Practitioners
Workload
Medication Adherence

Keywords

  • Community pharmacy services
  • General practitioners
  • New zealand
  • Primary health care
  • Professional role

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

General practitioners' views of pharmacists' current and potential contributions to medication review and prescribing in New Zealand. / Md Hatah, Ernieda; Braund, Rhiannon; Duffull, Stephen B.; Tordoff, June.

In: Journal of Primary Health Care, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2013, p. 223-233.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8b15cc41159d48af90539f43d1c6e4e4,
title = "General practitioners' views of pharmacists' current and potential contributions to medication review and prescribing in New Zealand",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: Internationally, non-medical practitioners are increasingly involved in tasks traditionally undertaken by general practitioners (GPs), such as medication review and prescribing. This study aims to evaluate GPs' perceptions of pharmacists' contributions to those services. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two localities with GPs whose patients had and had not undergone a pharmacist-led adherence support Medication Use Review (MUR). GPs were asked their opinions of pharmacists' provision of MUR, clinical medication review and prescribing. Data were analysed thematically using NVivo 8 and grouped by strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) category. FINDINGS: Eighteen GPs were interviewed. GPs mentioned their own skills, training and knowledge of clinical conditions. These were considered GPs' major strengths. GPs' perceived weaknesses were their time constraints and heavy workloads. GPs thought pharmacists' strengths were their knowledge of pharmacology and having more time for in-depth medication review than GPs. Nevertheless, GPs felt pharmacist-led medication reviews might confuse patients, and increase GP workloads. GPs were concerned that pharmacist prescribing might include pharmacists making a diagnosis. This is not the proposed model for New Zealand. In general, GPs were more accepting of pharmacists providing medication reviews than of pharmacist prescribing, unless appropriate controls, close collaboration and co-location of services took place. CONCLUSION: GPs perceived their own skills were well suited to reviewing medication and prescribing, but thought pharmacists might also have strengths and skills in these areas. In future, GPs thought that working together with pharmacists in these services might be possible in a collaborative setting.",
keywords = "Community pharmacy services, General practitioners, New zealand, Primary health care, Professional role",
author = "{Md Hatah}, Ernieda and Rhiannon Braund and Duffull, {Stephen B.} and June Tordoff",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "223--233",
journal = "Journal of Primary Health Care",
issn = "1172-6164",
publisher = "The Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - General practitioners' views of pharmacists' current and potential contributions to medication review and prescribing in New Zealand

AU - Md Hatah, Ernieda

AU - Braund, Rhiannon

AU - Duffull, Stephen B.

AU - Tordoff, June

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - INTRODUCTION: Internationally, non-medical practitioners are increasingly involved in tasks traditionally undertaken by general practitioners (GPs), such as medication review and prescribing. This study aims to evaluate GPs' perceptions of pharmacists' contributions to those services. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two localities with GPs whose patients had and had not undergone a pharmacist-led adherence support Medication Use Review (MUR). GPs were asked their opinions of pharmacists' provision of MUR, clinical medication review and prescribing. Data were analysed thematically using NVivo 8 and grouped by strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) category. FINDINGS: Eighteen GPs were interviewed. GPs mentioned their own skills, training and knowledge of clinical conditions. These were considered GPs' major strengths. GPs' perceived weaknesses were their time constraints and heavy workloads. GPs thought pharmacists' strengths were their knowledge of pharmacology and having more time for in-depth medication review than GPs. Nevertheless, GPs felt pharmacist-led medication reviews might confuse patients, and increase GP workloads. GPs were concerned that pharmacist prescribing might include pharmacists making a diagnosis. This is not the proposed model for New Zealand. In general, GPs were more accepting of pharmacists providing medication reviews than of pharmacist prescribing, unless appropriate controls, close collaboration and co-location of services took place. CONCLUSION: GPs perceived their own skills were well suited to reviewing medication and prescribing, but thought pharmacists might also have strengths and skills in these areas. In future, GPs thought that working together with pharmacists in these services might be possible in a collaborative setting.

AB - INTRODUCTION: Internationally, non-medical practitioners are increasingly involved in tasks traditionally undertaken by general practitioners (GPs), such as medication review and prescribing. This study aims to evaluate GPs' perceptions of pharmacists' contributions to those services. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two localities with GPs whose patients had and had not undergone a pharmacist-led adherence support Medication Use Review (MUR). GPs were asked their opinions of pharmacists' provision of MUR, clinical medication review and prescribing. Data were analysed thematically using NVivo 8 and grouped by strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) category. FINDINGS: Eighteen GPs were interviewed. GPs mentioned their own skills, training and knowledge of clinical conditions. These were considered GPs' major strengths. GPs' perceived weaknesses were their time constraints and heavy workloads. GPs thought pharmacists' strengths were their knowledge of pharmacology and having more time for in-depth medication review than GPs. Nevertheless, GPs felt pharmacist-led medication reviews might confuse patients, and increase GP workloads. GPs were concerned that pharmacist prescribing might include pharmacists making a diagnosis. This is not the proposed model for New Zealand. In general, GPs were more accepting of pharmacists providing medication reviews than of pharmacist prescribing, unless appropriate controls, close collaboration and co-location of services took place. CONCLUSION: GPs perceived their own skills were well suited to reviewing medication and prescribing, but thought pharmacists might also have strengths and skills in these areas. In future, GPs thought that working together with pharmacists in these services might be possible in a collaborative setting.

KW - Community pharmacy services

KW - General practitioners

KW - New zealand

KW - Primary health care

KW - Professional role

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883506675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883506675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 23998173

AN - SCOPUS:84883506675

VL - 5

SP - 223

EP - 233

JO - Journal of Primary Health Care

JF - Journal of Primary Health Care

SN - 1172-6164

IS - 3

ER -