Do community pharmacists have the attitudes and knowledge to support evidence based self-management of low back pain?

BACKGROUND: In many countries, community pharmacists can be consulted without appointment in a large number of convenient locations. They are in an ideal position to give advice to patients at the onset of low back pain and also reinforce advice given by other healthcare professionals. There is little specific information about the quality of care provided in the pharmacy for people with back pain. The main objectives of this survey were to determine the attitudes, knowledge and reported practice of English pharmacists advising people who present with acute or chronic low back pain. METHODS: A questionnaire was designed for anonymous self-completion by pharmacists attending continuing education sessions. Demographic questions were designed to allow comparison with a national pharmacy workforce survey. Attitudes were measured with the Back Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ) and questions based on the Working Backs Scotland campaign. Questions about the treatment of back pain in the community pharmacy were written (or adapted) to reflect and characterise the nature of practice. In response to two clinical vignettes, respondents were asked to select proposals that they would recommend in practice. RESULTS: 335 responses from community pharmacists were analysed. Middle aged pharmacists, women, pharmacy managers and locums were over-represented compared to registration and workforce data. The mean (SD) BBQ score for the pharmacists was 31.37 (5.75), which was slightly more positive than in similar surveys of other groups. Those who had suffered from back pain seem to demonstrate more confidence (fewer negative feelings, more advice opportunities and better advice provision) in their perception of advice given in the pharmacy. Awareness of written information that could help to support practice was low. Reponses to the clinical vignettes were generally in line with the evidence base. Pharmacists expressed some caution about recommending activity. Most respondents said they would benefit from more education about back pain. CONCLUSION: Those sampled generally expressed positive attitudes about back pain and were able to offer evidence based advice. Pharmacists may benefit from training to increase their ability and confidence to offer support for self-care in back pain. Further research would be useful to clarify the representativeness of the sample.

A feasibility study for recording of dispensing errors and near misses' in four UK primary care pharmacies.

Medication errors can occur at the prescribing, transcription, dispensing and administration stage of drug therapy. However, publication of the Organisation with a Memory (OWAM) by the Department of Health in the UK has raised awareness of the need for pharmacies to collect information about dispensing errors and near misses, which occur within an organisation. Such information provides valuable insights into the vulnerabilities of dispensing procedures and identifies areas for improvement in dispensing systems The main aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a self-reporting system for dispensing errors and near misses in primary care (community) pharmacies. It was also to identify the types of errors or near misses commonly encountered in community pharmacies. A data collection form was designed and modified for use after a pilot study. Four community pharmacies volunteered to participate in this feasibility study. The data collection was conducted in two phases each of 4 weeks' duration. Any dispensing errors and near misses that occurred during the study periods were recorded by the pharmacy staff in a standard data collection form. A focus group discussion was held with the dispensing staff of participating pharmacies to identify and evaluate the feasibility of the reporting system. Out of a total of 51 357 items dispensed during the two phases of the study, 39 dispensing errors (0.08%) and 247 near misses (0.48%) were detected. The results show that near misses occurred six times more often than dispensing errors, indicating the importance of final checking in pharmacies. The most common types of dispensing errors or near misses appeared to be incorrect strength of medication, followed by incorrect drug, incorrect quantity, incorrect dosage form and incorrect label. Feedback during the focus group discussion indicated that the outcome of the self-reporting scheme was more important than the incidence of errors or near misses. Participating pharmacies also agreed that the self-reporting scheme used was feasible and they would continue using the scheme although some incentives would be helpful. The quantitative results of this study and the qualitative feedback from the participating pharmacies indicate that the self-reporting scheme used is practical and feasible.