初级保健中全面药学实践的障碍:药剂师获得实验室检测的系统回顾

IF 1.6 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Canadian Pharmacists Journal Pub Date : 2019-08-06 DOI:10.1177/1715163519865759
Jacqueline Donovan, R. Tsuyuki, Yazid N. Al Hamarneh, B. Bajorek
{"title":"初级保健中全面药学实践的障碍:药剂师获得实验室检测的系统回顾","authors":"Jacqueline Donovan, R. Tsuyuki, Yazid N. Al Hamarneh, B. Bajorek","doi":"10.1177/1715163519865759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To describe primary care pharmacists’ current scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. Method: A 2-tiered search of key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE) and grey literature with the following MeSH headings: prescribing, pharmacist/pharmacy, laboratory test, collaborative practice, protocols/guidelines. We focused on Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia for this review. Results: There is limited literature exploring primary care pharmacists’ scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. The majority of literature is from the United States and Canada, with some from the United Kingdom and New Zealand and none from Australia. Overall, there is a difference in regulations between and within these countries, with the key difference being whether pharmacists access and/or order laboratory testing dependently or independently. Canadian pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests independently or dependently, depending on the province they practise in. US pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests dependently within collaborative practice agreements. In the United Kingdom, laboratory testing can be performed by independent prescribing pharmacists or dependently by supplementary prescribing pharmacists. New Zealand prescribing pharmacists can order laboratory testing independently. Most publications do not report on the types of laboratory tests used by pharmacists, but those that do predominantly resulted in positive patient outcomes. Discussion/Conclusion: Primary care pharmacists’ scope of practice in laboratory testing is presently limited to certain jurisdictions and is often performed in a dependent fashion. As such, a full scope of pharmacy services is almost entirely unavailable to patients in the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Just as in the case for pharmacists prescribing, evidence indicates better patient outcomes when pharmacists can access/order laboratory tests, but more research needs to be done alongside the implementation of local guidelines and practice standards for pharmacists who practise in that realm. Patients around the world deserve to receive a full scope of pharmacists’ practice, and lack of access to laboratory testing is one of the major obstacles to this. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2019;152:xx-xx.","PeriodicalId":46612,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Pharmacists Journal","volume":"152 1","pages":"317 - 333"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1715163519865759","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers to a full scope of pharmacy practice in primary care: A systematic review of pharmacists’ access to laboratory testing\",\"authors\":\"Jacqueline Donovan, R. Tsuyuki, Yazid N. Al Hamarneh, B. Bajorek\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1715163519865759\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: To describe primary care pharmacists’ current scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. Method: A 2-tiered search of key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE) and grey literature with the following MeSH headings: prescribing, pharmacist/pharmacy, laboratory test, collaborative practice, protocols/guidelines. We focused on Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia for this review. Results: There is limited literature exploring primary care pharmacists’ scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. The majority of literature is from the United States and Canada, with some from the United Kingdom and New Zealand and none from Australia. Overall, there is a difference in regulations between and within these countries, with the key difference being whether pharmacists access and/or order laboratory testing dependently or independently. Canadian pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests independently or dependently, depending on the province they practise in. US pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests dependently within collaborative practice agreements. In the United Kingdom, laboratory testing can be performed by independent prescribing pharmacists or dependently by supplementary prescribing pharmacists. New Zealand prescribing pharmacists can order laboratory testing independently. Most publications do not report on the types of laboratory tests used by pharmacists, but those that do predominantly resulted in positive patient outcomes. Discussion/Conclusion: Primary care pharmacists’ scope of practice in laboratory testing is presently limited to certain jurisdictions and is often performed in a dependent fashion. As such, a full scope of pharmacy services is almost entirely unavailable to patients in the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Just as in the case for pharmacists prescribing, evidence indicates better patient outcomes when pharmacists can access/order laboratory tests, but more research needs to be done alongside the implementation of local guidelines and practice standards for pharmacists who practise in that realm. Patients around the world deserve to receive a full scope of pharmacists’ practice, and lack of access to laboratory testing is one of the major obstacles to this. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2019;152:xx-xx.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Pharmacists Journal\",\"volume\":\"152 1\",\"pages\":\"317 - 333\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1715163519865759\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Pharmacists Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1715163519865759\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Pharmacists Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1715163519865759","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的:描述初级保健药剂师目前在实验室测试方面的执业范围。方法:对关键数据库(PubMed、EMBASE、MEDLINE)和灰色文献进行两层搜索,标题为以下MeSH:处方、药剂师/药房、实验室测试、合作实践、方案/指南。本次审查的重点是加拿大、美国、联合王国、新西兰和澳大利亚。结果:探索初级保健药剂师在实验室测试方面的执业范围的文献有限。大部分文献来自美国和加拿大,其中一些来自英国和新西兰,没有一篇来自澳大利亚。总的来说,这些国家之间和内部的法规存在差异,关键的区别在于药剂师是独立还是独立地进行和/或下令进行实验室检测。加拿大药剂师可以根据其执业的省份独立或独立地获取和/或订购实验室测试。美国药剂师可以在合作执业协议中独立获取和//或订购实验测试。在英国,实验室检测可以由独立的处方药剂师进行,也可以由补充处方药剂师独立进行。新西兰处方药剂师可以独立进行实验室检测。大多数出版物都没有报道药剂师使用的实验室测试类型,但那些主要导致阳性患者结果的测试。讨论/结论:初级保健药剂师在实验室检测方面的执业范围目前仅限于某些司法管辖区,并且通常以依赖的方式进行。因此,美国、英国、新西兰和澳大利亚的患者几乎完全无法获得全方位的药房服务。正如药剂师开处方的情况一样,有证据表明,当药剂师可以访问/订购实验室测试时,患者的结果会更好,但在实施当地指南和该领域执业药剂师的执业标准的同时,还需要进行更多的研究。世界各地的患者都应该得到全方位的药剂师执业,而缺乏实验室检测是实现这一目标的主要障碍之一。Can Pharm J(Ott)2019;152:xx-xx。
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
Barriers to a full scope of pharmacy practice in primary care: A systematic review of pharmacists’ access to laboratory testing
Objectives: To describe primary care pharmacists’ current scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. Method: A 2-tiered search of key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE) and grey literature with the following MeSH headings: prescribing, pharmacist/pharmacy, laboratory test, collaborative practice, protocols/guidelines. We focused on Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia for this review. Results: There is limited literature exploring primary care pharmacists’ scope of practice in relation to laboratory testing. The majority of literature is from the United States and Canada, with some from the United Kingdom and New Zealand and none from Australia. Overall, there is a difference in regulations between and within these countries, with the key difference being whether pharmacists access and/or order laboratory testing dependently or independently. Canadian pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests independently or dependently, depending on the province they practise in. US pharmacists can access and/or order laboratory tests dependently within collaborative practice agreements. In the United Kingdom, laboratory testing can be performed by independent prescribing pharmacists or dependently by supplementary prescribing pharmacists. New Zealand prescribing pharmacists can order laboratory testing independently. Most publications do not report on the types of laboratory tests used by pharmacists, but those that do predominantly resulted in positive patient outcomes. Discussion/Conclusion: Primary care pharmacists’ scope of practice in laboratory testing is presently limited to certain jurisdictions and is often performed in a dependent fashion. As such, a full scope of pharmacy services is almost entirely unavailable to patients in the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Just as in the case for pharmacists prescribing, evidence indicates better patient outcomes when pharmacists can access/order laboratory tests, but more research needs to be done alongside the implementation of local guidelines and practice standards for pharmacists who practise in that realm. Patients around the world deserve to receive a full scope of pharmacists’ practice, and lack of access to laboratory testing is one of the major obstacles to this. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2019;152:xx-xx.
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
Canadian Pharmacists Journal
Canadian Pharmacists Journal PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
26.70%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Established in 1868, the Canadian Pharmacists Journal is the oldest continuously published periodical in Canada. Our mission is to enhance patient care through advancement of pharmacy practice, with continuing professional development, peer-reviewed research, and advocacy. Our vision is to become the foremost journal for pharmacy practice and research.
期刊最新文献
The role of Alberta pharmacists working in opioid use disorder and their potential to prescribe buprenorphine-naloxone: A qualitative study. Opportunities and challenges associated with the launch of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) in British Columbia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study to explore community pharmacists' perspectives. Lyme disease chemoprophylaxis prescribing before and after pharmacist prescriptive authority in Nova Scotia. Enabling pharmacist prescribing: Lessons learned in Nova Scotia using behaviour change theory. British Columbia community pharmacy during COVID-19: Describing the patient experience via Google reviews.
×
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