Interprofessional communication between community pharmacists and general practitioners: a qualitative study

2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Weissenborn ◽  
Walter E. Haefeli ◽  
Frank Peters-Klimm ◽  
Hanna M. Seidling
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 340
Author(s):  
Chloë Campbell ◽  
Caroline Morris ◽  
Lynn McBain

ABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONDuring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic lockdown in New Zealand in March 2020, there was a rapid shift to virtual consultations in primary care. This change was supported by system adjustments to enable electronic transmission of prescriptions without a handwritten signature if they met certain security criteria. International research suggests potential for unintended consequences with such changes, so it is important to understand the effect on professional practice in New Zealand general practice and community pharmacy.AIMThe purpose of this study was to undertake a preliminary exploration of the experiences of New Zealand general practitioners and community pharmacists when prescriptions are transmitted electronically directly from prescriber to pharmacy.METHODSSemi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of four pharmacists and four general practitioners gathered qualitative data about their experiences of the shift to electronic transmission of prescriptions. Participants’ perceptions of effect on professional workflow, interprofessional interactions between general practitioners and pharmacists, and interactions with patients were explored. Interviews were audio-recorded, and the data analysed thematically using an inductive approach.RESULTSFour themes were identified: workflow transformation; mixed impact on interactions with patients; juggling timing and expectations; and new avenues for interprofessional communication (with some cul-de-sacs).DISCUSSIONBoth general practitioners and pharmacists experienced transformational changes to workflow. This was positive for general practitioners due to saved time and increased work flexibility. Pharmacists noted potential benefits but also some challenges. To fully reap teamwork benefits, more work is needed on managing the timing issues and patient expectations, and to refine the new modes of communication between health-care practitioners.


Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 1072
Author(s):  
Agne Valinciute-Jankauskiene ◽  
Loreta Kubiliene

Lithuania is the leader in pharmacovigilance among the three Baltic countries. However, comparisons with other European countries are difficult because the reported number of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in Lithuania is too low to rely on in terms of the annual use of medicines by the population over the year. The aim of this study was to explore challenges related to the understanding and practices of general practitioners and community pharmacists in reporting ADRs in Lithuania. The qualitative study approach of face-to-face interviews was used. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. Twelve interviews with general practitioners and community pharmacists were conducted from March 2020 through December 2020. All participants had a basic knowledge of pharmacovigilance, but only four participants reported ADRs to the interviewer. Six main barriers regarding ADR reporting were identified, and appropriate interventions were suggested. The importance of collaboration between physicians and pharmacists was highlighted, and the need for guidelines supporting collaboration was expressed. Medications are becoming more complex, and comprehensive medication management is key for the optimization of patient outcomes. Our results reveal the need to improve and innovate the current pharmacovigilance system at all levels, starting from education for pharmacy and healthcare students and continuing through the development of ADR procedures.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Navina Gerlach ◽  
Matthias Michiels-Corsten ◽  
Annika Viniol ◽  
Tanja Schleef ◽  
Ulrike Junius-Walker ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 352-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Maria Jové ◽  
Ana Fernández ◽  
Carmel Hughes ◽  
Mireia Guillén-Solà ◽  
Marta Rovira ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Navina Gerlach ◽  
Matthias Michiels-Corsten ◽  
Annika Viniol ◽  
Tanja Schleef ◽  
Ulrike Junius-Walker ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Collaborative care approaches between general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists have received international recognition for medication optimization and deprescribing efforts. Although specialist providers have been shown to influence deprescribing, their profession so far remains omitted from collaborative care approaches for medication optimization. Similarly, while explorative studies on role perception and collaboration between GPs and pharmacists grow, interaction with specialists for medication optimization is neglected. Our qualitative study therefore aims to explore GPs’, community pharmacists’ and specialist providers’ role perceptions of deprescribing, and to identify interpersonal as well as structural factors that may influence collaborative medication optimization approaches.Method: Seven focus-group discussions with GPs, community pharmacists and community specialists were conducted in Hesse and Lower Saxony, Germany. The topic guide focused on views and experiences with deprescribing with special attention to inter-professional collaboration. We conducted conventional content analysis and conceptualized emerging themes using the Theoretical Domains Framework.Results: 26 GPs, four community pharmacists and three community specialists took part in the study. The main themes corresponded to the four domains ´Social/professional role and identity` (1), ´Social influences’ (2), ´Reinforcement` (3) and ´Environmental context and resources’ (4) which were further described by beliefs statements, that is inductively developed key messages. For (1), GPs emerged as central medication managers while pharmacists and specialists were assigned confined or subordinated tasks in deprescribing. Social influences (2) encompassed patients’ trust in GPs as a support, while specialists and pharmacists were believed to threaten GPs’ role and deprescribing attempts. Reinforcements (3) negatively affected GPs’ and pharmacists’ effort in medication optimization by social reprimand and lacking reward. Environmental context (4) impeded deprescribing efforts by deficient reimbursement and resources as well as fragmentation of care, while informational and gate-keeping resources remained underutilized. Conclusion: Understanding stakeholders’ role perceptions on collaborative deprescribing is a prerequisite for joint approaches to medication management. We found that clear definition and dissemination of roles and responsibilities are premise for avoiding intergroup conflicts. Role performance and collaboration must further be supported by structural factors like adequate reimbursement, resources and a transparent continuity of care.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christin Löffler ◽  
Carolin Koudmani ◽  
Femke Böhmer ◽  
Susanne D. Paschka ◽  
Jennifer Höck ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Rubio-Valera ◽  
Anna Maria Jové ◽  
Carmel M Hughes ◽  
Mireia Guillen-Solà ◽  
Marta Rovira ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Anneleen Robberechts ◽  
Céline De Petter ◽  
Lindsey Van Loon ◽  
Silas Rydant ◽  
Stephane Steurbaut ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Navina Gerlach ◽  
Matthias Michiels-Corsten ◽  
Norbert Donner-Banzhoff ◽  
Annika Viniol ◽  
Tanja Schleef ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Collaborative care approaches between general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists have received international recognition for medication optimisation and deprescribing efforts. Although even specialist providers have been shown to influence deprescribing, their profession so far remains omitted from collaborative care approaches for medication optimisation. Similarly, while explorative studies on role perception and collaboration between GPs and pharmacists grow, interaction with specialists for medication optimisation is neglected. Our qualitative study therefore aims to explore GPs`, community pharmacists` and specialist providers` role perceptions of deprescribing, and to identify interpersonal as well as structural factors that may influence collaborative medication optimisation approaches. Method: Seven focus-group discussions with GPs, community pharmacists and community specialists were conducted in Hesse and Lower Saxony, Germany. The topic guide focused on views and experiences with deprescribing with special attention to inter-professional cooperation. We used conventional content analysis following an inductive-deductive approach. Results: Our exploration of role perceptions revealed factors influencing deprescribing collaboration on both interpersonal and structural levels. On interpersonal level, conflicting role positions exposed in clashes of perceived authority, while conflicting role functions were indicated by disagreement on responsibility for deprescribing tasks between stakeholder groups, and resulted in underutilisation of services. Lacking communication was reported as a general barrier to cooperation. On a structural level, missing transparency on medication information across providers and deficient reimbursement for medication optimisation activities emerged as most pronounced obstacles for successful collaborative deprescribing. Also, unclear definition of task division between professional groups provoked difficulties. Conclusion: Revealing relevant stakeholders` role perceptions on their responsibilities and delimitations for joint deprescribing is a prerequisite for collaborative care approaches. Our study revealed several preconditions for joint deprescribing action that emerge from the German setting, but may as well inform other health-systems. As such, necessary medication transparency may be enabled by sector-wide electronic health records. For clarification of role definitions, joint training sessions across stakeholder groups may strengthen future cooperation. Finally, even redefining professional roles should be considered to strengthen GPs` regulatory functions and promote a continuity of care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document