全科社区药师咨询服务:一项探索性患者调查。

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE BJGP Open Pub Date : 2024-12-18 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0204
Julia Gauly, Catherine Grimley, Jeremy Dale, Paramjit Gill, Helen Atherton
{"title":"全科社区药师咨询服务:一项探索性患者调查。","authors":"Julia Gauly, Catherine Grimley, Jeremy Dale, Paramjit Gill, Helen Atherton","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The General Practice Community Pharmacist Consultation Service (GP CPCS) was established to allow patients with certain minor illnesses to be referred to a community pharmacy for assessment and treatment.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore patients' experiences of the GP CPCS.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>An online survey in two regions of England.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>25 general practices invited patients to take part in an exploratory survey. Descriptive statistics were used for the analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 5.1% (72/1423). Prior to contacting their general practice, 14.1% (9/64) had tried to speak to a pharmacist. Most respondents accepted the CPCS referral (77.3%, 51/66), received a pharmacy consultation on the same day (80.0%, 40/50) and were largely satisfied with the amount of time the pharmacist spent with them (82.5%, 33/40) the consultation format (68.3%, 28/41) and the privacy provided during the consultation (80.9%, 38/47).However, most respondents (56.5%, 39/69) felt poorly informed by the general practice on why they were being advised to speak to a pharmacist and did not feel that it was appropriate that they had been advised to speak to a community pharmacist (54.2%, 39/72). Only 33.3% (16/48) felt that their consultation fully met their health needs and 27.1% (13/48) of patients described being re-referred from pharmacy back to their general practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this exploratory study patients were largely accepting of the GP CPCS. Improvements in terms of explaining GP CPCS to patients, selecting patients appropriate for referral to the service and the appointment process may be of benefit.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"General practice community pharmacist consultation service: an exploratory patient survey.\",\"authors\":\"Julia Gauly, Catherine Grimley, Jeremy Dale, Paramjit Gill, Helen Atherton\",\"doi\":\"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The General Practice Community Pharmacist Consultation Service (GP CPCS) was established to allow patients with certain minor illnesses to be referred to a community pharmacy for assessment and treatment.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore patients' experiences of the GP CPCS.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>An online survey in two regions of England.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>25 general practices invited patients to take part in an exploratory survey. Descriptive statistics were used for the analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 5.1% (72/1423). Prior to contacting their general practice, 14.1% (9/64) had tried to speak to a pharmacist. Most respondents accepted the CPCS referral (77.3%, 51/66), received a pharmacy consultation on the same day (80.0%, 40/50) and were largely satisfied with the amount of time the pharmacist spent with them (82.5%, 33/40) the consultation format (68.3%, 28/41) and the privacy provided during the consultation (80.9%, 38/47).However, most respondents (56.5%, 39/69) felt poorly informed by the general practice on why they were being advised to speak to a pharmacist and did not feel that it was appropriate that they had been advised to speak to a community pharmacist (54.2%, 39/72). Only 33.3% (16/48) felt that their consultation fully met their health needs and 27.1% (13/48) of patients described being re-referred from pharmacy back to their general practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this exploratory study patients were largely accepting of the GP CPCS. Improvements in terms of explaining GP CPCS to patients, selecting patients appropriate for referral to the service and the appointment process may be of benefit.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJGP Open\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BJGP Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0204\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:全科社区药剂师咨询服务(GP CPCS)的设立是为了让患有某些轻微疾病的患者能够被转介到社区药房接受评估和治疗。目的:探讨患者对全科社区药剂师咨询服务的体验:方法:25 家全科诊所邀请患者参与探索性调查。采用描述性统计进行分析:回复率为 5.1%(72/1423)。在联系综合诊所之前,14.1%(9/64)的患者曾尝试与药剂师交谈。大多数受访者接受了 CPCS 转介(77.3%,51/66),在当天接受了药剂师咨询(80.0%,40/50),并对药剂师与他们交谈的时间(82.5%,33/40)、咨询形式(68.3%,28/41)和咨询过程中提供的隐私(80.9%,38/47)基本满意。然而,大多数受访者(56.5%,39/69)认为全科医生没有告诉他们为什么建议他们与药剂师交谈,也不认为建议他们与社区药剂师交谈是合适的(54.2%,39/72)。只有 33.3%(16/48)的患者认为他们的咨询完全满足了他们的健康需求,27.1%(13/48)的患者描述了他们从药房被转诊回全科诊所的情况:在这项探索性研究中,患者基本上接受全科医生CPCS。在向患者解释全科医生社区病人护理服务、选择适合转介到该服务的患者以及预约流程方面的改进可能会有所裨益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
General practice community pharmacist consultation service: an exploratory patient survey.

Background: The General Practice Community Pharmacist Consultation Service (GP CPCS) was established to allow patients with certain minor illnesses to be referred to a community pharmacy for assessment and treatment.

Aim: To explore patients' experiences of the GP CPCS.

Design & setting: An online survey in two regions of England.

Method: 25 general practices invited patients to take part in an exploratory survey. Descriptive statistics were used for the analysis.

Results: The response rate was 5.1% (72/1423). Prior to contacting their general practice, 14.1% (9/64) had tried to speak to a pharmacist. Most respondents accepted the CPCS referral (77.3%, 51/66), received a pharmacy consultation on the same day (80.0%, 40/50) and were largely satisfied with the amount of time the pharmacist spent with them (82.5%, 33/40) the consultation format (68.3%, 28/41) and the privacy provided during the consultation (80.9%, 38/47).However, most respondents (56.5%, 39/69) felt poorly informed by the general practice on why they were being advised to speak to a pharmacist and did not feel that it was appropriate that they had been advised to speak to a community pharmacist (54.2%, 39/72). Only 33.3% (16/48) felt that their consultation fully met their health needs and 27.1% (13/48) of patients described being re-referred from pharmacy back to their general practice.

Conclusion: In this exploratory study patients were largely accepting of the GP CPCS. Improvements in terms of explaining GP CPCS to patients, selecting patients appropriate for referral to the service and the appointment process may be of benefit.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
The association between coding for chronic kidney disease and kidney replacement therapy incidence at CCG-level in England: an ecological study. Lifestyle interventions for depression in primary care: a qualitative study. Factors associated with link workers considering leaving their role: a cross-sectional survey. Adjusting primary-care funding by deprivation: a cross-sectional study of Lower layer Super Output Areas in England. Identifying impaired mental health in patients with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in general practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1