Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists

Background: Community pharmacies and hospitals are the two main professional areas for pharmacists. There is currently a lack of comparison of pharmacists working in these two distinct settings in relation to an expanded prescribing role. Objective: To compare the attitudes of hospital and community...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hoti, Kreshnik, Hughes, Jeffery, Sunderland, Bruce
Format: Journal Article
Published: Springer Netherlands 2013
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/29296
_version_ 1848752765309812736
author Hoti, Kreshnik
Hughes, Jeffery
Sunderland, Bruce
author_facet Hoti, Kreshnik
Hughes, Jeffery
Sunderland, Bruce
author_sort Hoti, Kreshnik
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Background: Community pharmacies and hospitals are the two main professional areas for pharmacists. There is currently a lack of comparison of pharmacists working in these two distinct settings in relation to an expanded prescribing role. Objective: To compare the attitudes of hospital and community pharmacists regarding an expanded prescribing role. Setting: Australian pharmacists. Methods: A self-administered postal survey was used to collect the data. Data analysis was performed using SPSS® v19. Kendall’s tau-c test was used to compare the mean values between categorical variables (i.e. hospital or community pharmacists) and continuous variables measuring attitudes on a Likert scale (i.e. reasons in favour and barriers of pharmacist prescribing, preferred therapeutic areas of prescribing and prescribing models). A Chi square test was used to analyse categorical variables (i.e. demographics). Main outcome measure: The opinion of hospital and community pharmacists regarding an expanded prescribing role. Results: A response rate of 40.4 % was achieved (1,049/2,592). Where significant differences were located, community pharmacists were more supportive of all proffered potential reasons in favour of pharmacist prescribing (p < 0.05) whereas hospital pharmacists were more in agreement with all suggested barriers to such a role (p < 0.05). In a supplementary (collaborative) prescribing model, hospital pharmacists were more confident than community pharmacists in prescribing for heart failure (p < 0.001) and anticoagulant therapies (p = 0.004). In an independent prescribing model hospital pharmacists were more supportive of prescribing anticoagulant therapies (p = 0.002). Significant differences were found between the two groups in relation to their support for independent prescribing (p = 0.020) and extension of the emergency supply 3 days rule to 30 days (p = 0.011).Conclusion: This study suggests that there are differences between hospital and community pharmacists in what they regard as potential reasons in favour of an expanded pharmacist prescribing role, perceived barriers to such a role and whether to prescribe independently of doctors. Hospital pharmacists’ attitudinal differences in terms of support for certain therapeutic areas of prescribing reflects probably their existing active role in clinical decision making processes in patients who are often seriously ill.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T08:13:49Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-29296
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T08:13:49Z
publishDate 2013
publisher Springer Netherlands
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-292962017-09-13T16:09:10Z Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists Hoti, Kreshnik Hughes, Jeffery Sunderland, Bruce supplementary prescribing pharmacist prescribing independent prescribing Australia hospital pharmacists community pharmacists pharmacist role Background: Community pharmacies and hospitals are the two main professional areas for pharmacists. There is currently a lack of comparison of pharmacists working in these two distinct settings in relation to an expanded prescribing role. Objective: To compare the attitudes of hospital and community pharmacists regarding an expanded prescribing role. Setting: Australian pharmacists. Methods: A self-administered postal survey was used to collect the data. Data analysis was performed using SPSS® v19. Kendall’s tau-c test was used to compare the mean values between categorical variables (i.e. hospital or community pharmacists) and continuous variables measuring attitudes on a Likert scale (i.e. reasons in favour and barriers of pharmacist prescribing, preferred therapeutic areas of prescribing and prescribing models). A Chi square test was used to analyse categorical variables (i.e. demographics). Main outcome measure: The opinion of hospital and community pharmacists regarding an expanded prescribing role. Results: A response rate of 40.4 % was achieved (1,049/2,592). Where significant differences were located, community pharmacists were more supportive of all proffered potential reasons in favour of pharmacist prescribing (p < 0.05) whereas hospital pharmacists were more in agreement with all suggested barriers to such a role (p < 0.05). In a supplementary (collaborative) prescribing model, hospital pharmacists were more confident than community pharmacists in prescribing for heart failure (p < 0.001) and anticoagulant therapies (p = 0.004). In an independent prescribing model hospital pharmacists were more supportive of prescribing anticoagulant therapies (p = 0.002). Significant differences were found between the two groups in relation to their support for independent prescribing (p = 0.020) and extension of the emergency supply 3 days rule to 30 days (p = 0.011).Conclusion: This study suggests that there are differences between hospital and community pharmacists in what they regard as potential reasons in favour of an expanded pharmacist prescribing role, perceived barriers to such a role and whether to prescribe independently of doctors. Hospital pharmacists’ attitudinal differences in terms of support for certain therapeutic areas of prescribing reflects probably their existing active role in clinical decision making processes in patients who are often seriously ill. 2013 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/29296 10.1007/s11096-013-9766-z Springer Netherlands restricted
spellingShingle supplementary prescribing
pharmacist prescribing
independent prescribing
Australia
hospital pharmacists
community pharmacists
pharmacist role
Hoti, Kreshnik
Hughes, Jeffery
Sunderland, Bruce
Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists
title Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists
title_full Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists
title_fullStr Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists
title_full_unstemmed Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists
title_short Expanded prescribing: A comparison of the views of Australian hospital and community pharmacists
title_sort expanded prescribing: a comparison of the views of australian hospital and community pharmacists
topic supplementary prescribing
pharmacist prescribing
independent prescribing
Australia
hospital pharmacists
community pharmacists
pharmacist role
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/29296