The use of community pharmacies in North West England: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: There are few studies of community pharmacy footfall and activity in the existing literature, especially by direct observation. OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of counter interactions between pharmacy staff and customers. METHOD: Structured observation of all interactions between pharmacy staff and customers across the weekly opening hours of five pharmacies diverse in location and ownership. KEY FINDINGS: Three-quarters (76%) of observed interactions were associated with prescriptions, but a significant minority accessed cognitive services. CONCLUSIONS: Dispensing was the primary activity across the diverse range of pharmacies. Reasons for visits are diversifying into advice and services, particularly among younger users.

Emergency supply of prescription-only medicines to patients by community pharmacists: a mixed methods evaluation incorporating patient, pharmacist and GP perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and inform emergency supply of prescription-only medicines by community pharmacists (CPs), including how the service could form an integral component of established healthcare provision to maximise adherence. DESIGN: Mixed methods. 4 phases: prospective audit of emergency supply requests for prescribed medicines (October-November 2012 and April 2013); interviews with CPs (February-April 2013); follow-up interviews with patients (April-May 2013); interactive feedback sessions with general practice teams (October-November 2013). SETTING: 22 community pharmacies and 6 general practices in Northwest England. PARTICIPANTS: 27 CPs with experience of dealing with requests for emergency supplies; 25 patients who received an emergency supply of a prescribed medicine; 58 staff at 6 general practices. RESULTS: Clinical audit in 22 pharmacies over two 4-week periods reported that 526 medicines were requested by 450 patients. Requests peaked over a bank holiday and around weekends. A significant number of supplies were made during practice opening hours. Most requests were for older patients and for medicines used in long-term conditions. Difficulty in renewing repeat medication (forgetting to order, or prescription delays) was the major reason for requests. The majority of medicines were 'loaned' in advance of a National Health Service (NHS) prescription. Interviews with CPs and patients indicated that continuous supply had a positive impact on medicines adherence, removing the need to access urgent care. General practice staff were surprised and concerned by the extent of emergency supply episodes. CONCLUSIONS: CPs regularly provide emergency supplies to patients who run out of their repeat medication, including during practice opening hours. This may aid adherence. There is currently no feedback loop, however, to general practice. Patient care and interprofessional communication may be better served by the introduction of a formally structured and funded NHS emergency supply service from community pharmacies, with ongoing optimisation of repeat prescribing.

Involving community pharmacists in pharmacy practice research: experiences of peer interviewing.

BACKGROUND: Translation of interest in research into active engagement of community pharmacists as research partners/co-researchers remains a challenge. Involving pharmacists in specific research techniques such as peer interviewing, however, may enhance validity of the results. OBJECTIVE: To enhance community pharmacists' involvement in pharmacy practice research through peer interview training. METHOD: A subgroup of participants in a multi-phase pharmacy practice research project trained to do peer interviews. These pharmacist interviewers attended a workshop and were mentored. Comments from their feedback forms and ongoing engagement with the Research Associate were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Positive themes from five interviewers included the importance of the topic and their wish to learn skills beyond their everyday role. The small group format of the training day helped to build confidence. Interviewers felt their shared professional background helped them to capture relevant comments and probe effectively. There were challenges, however, for interviewers to balance research activities with their daily work. Interviewers experienced difficulty in securing uninterrupted time with interviewees which sometimes affected data quality by 'rushing'. CONCLUSION: Community pharmacists can be engaged as peer interviewers to the benefit of the volunteers and research team, but must be well resourced and supported.