Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK

A thematic review of the literature

Richard Jason Cooper, Claire Anderson, Tony Avery, Paul Bissell, Louise Guillaume, Allen Hutchinson, Veronica James, Joanne Lymn, Aileen McIntosh, Elizabeth Murphy, Julie Ratcliffe, Sue Read, Paul Ward

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

63 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives
Supplementary prescribing (SP) represents a recent development in non-medical prescribing in the UK, involving a tripartite agreement between independent medical prescriber, dependent prescriber and patient, enabling the dependent prescriber to prescribe in accordance with a patient-specific clinical management plan (CMP). The aim in this paper is to review, thematically, the literature on nurse and pharmacist SP, to inform further research, policy and education.

Methods
A review of the nursing and pharmacy SP literature from 1997 to 2007 was undertaken using searches of electronic databases, grey literature and journal hand searches.

Results
Nurses and pharmacists were positive about SP but the medical profession were more critical and lacked awareness/understanding, according to the identified literature. SP was identified in many clinical settings but implementation barriers emerged from the empirical and anecdotal literature, including funding problems, delays in practicing and obtaining prescription pads, encumbering clinical management plans and access to records. Empirical studies were often methodological weaknesses and under-evaluation of safety, economic analysis and patients’ experiences were identified in empirical studies. There was a perception that nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing may supersede supplementary prescribing.

Conclusions
There is a need for additional research regarding SP and despite nurses’ and pharmacists’ enthusiasm, implementation issues, medical apathy and independent prescribing potentially undermine the success of SP.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)277-292
Number of pages16
JournalHealth Policy
Volume85
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Pharmacists
Nurses
Literature
Apathy
Research
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Prescriptions
Nursing
Databases
Safety
Education

Cite this

Cooper, R. J., Anderson, C., Avery, T., Bissell, P., Guillaume, L., Hutchinson, A., ... Ward, P. (2008). Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK: A thematic review of the literature. Health Policy, 85(3), 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.07.016
Cooper, Richard Jason ; Anderson, Claire ; Avery, Tony ; Bissell, Paul ; Guillaume, Louise ; Hutchinson, Allen ; James, Veronica ; Lymn, Joanne ; McIntosh, Aileen ; Murphy, Elizabeth ; Ratcliffe, Julie ; Read, Sue ; Ward, Paul. / Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK : A thematic review of the literature. In: Health Policy. 2008 ; Vol. 85, No. 3. pp. 277-292.
@article{251fdc5aa45d4ac7a763acd09278c1de,
title = "Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK: A thematic review of the literature",
abstract = "ObjectivesSupplementary prescribing (SP) represents a recent development in non-medical prescribing in the UK, involving a tripartite agreement between independent medical prescriber, dependent prescriber and patient, enabling the dependent prescriber to prescribe in accordance with a patient-specific clinical management plan (CMP). The aim in this paper is to review, thematically, the literature on nurse and pharmacist SP, to inform further research, policy and education.MethodsA review of the nursing and pharmacy SP literature from 1997 to 2007 was undertaken using searches of electronic databases, grey literature and journal hand searches.ResultsNurses and pharmacists were positive about SP but the medical profession were more critical and lacked awareness/understanding, according to the identified literature. SP was identified in many clinical settings but implementation barriers emerged from the empirical and anecdotal literature, including funding problems, delays in practicing and obtaining prescription pads, encumbering clinical management plans and access to records. Empirical studies were often methodological weaknesses and under-evaluation of safety, economic analysis and patients’ experiences were identified in empirical studies. There was a perception that nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing may supersede supplementary prescribing.ConclusionsThere is a need for additional research regarding SP and despite nurses’ and pharmacists’ enthusiasm, implementation issues, medical apathy and independent prescribing potentially undermine the success of SP.",
keywords = "Nurse, Pharmacist, Supplementary prescribing, Literature review",
author = "Cooper, {Richard Jason} and Claire Anderson and Tony Avery and Paul Bissell and Louise Guillaume and Allen Hutchinson and Veronica James and Joanne Lymn and Aileen McIntosh and Elizabeth Murphy and Julie Ratcliffe and Sue Read and Paul Ward",
year = "2008",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.07.016",
language = "English",
volume = "85",
pages = "277--292",
journal = "Health Policy",
issn = "0168-8510",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "3",

}

Cooper, RJ, Anderson, C, Avery, T, Bissell, P, Guillaume, L, Hutchinson, A, James, V, Lymn, J, McIntosh, A, Murphy, E, Ratcliffe, J, Read, S & Ward, P 2008, 'Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK: A thematic review of the literature', Health Policy, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 277-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.07.016

Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK : A thematic review of the literature. / Cooper, Richard Jason; Anderson, Claire; Avery, Tony; Bissell, Paul; Guillaume, Louise; Hutchinson, Allen; James, Veronica; Lymn, Joanne; McIntosh, Aileen; Murphy, Elizabeth; Ratcliffe, Julie; Read, Sue; Ward, Paul.

In: Health Policy, Vol. 85, No. 3, 03.2008, p. 277-292.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK

T2 - A thematic review of the literature

AU - Cooper, Richard Jason

AU - Anderson, Claire

AU - Avery, Tony

AU - Bissell, Paul

AU - Guillaume, Louise

AU - Hutchinson, Allen

AU - James, Veronica

AU - Lymn, Joanne

AU - McIntosh, Aileen

AU - Murphy, Elizabeth

AU - Ratcliffe, Julie

AU - Read, Sue

AU - Ward, Paul

PY - 2008/3

Y1 - 2008/3

N2 - ObjectivesSupplementary prescribing (SP) represents a recent development in non-medical prescribing in the UK, involving a tripartite agreement between independent medical prescriber, dependent prescriber and patient, enabling the dependent prescriber to prescribe in accordance with a patient-specific clinical management plan (CMP). The aim in this paper is to review, thematically, the literature on nurse and pharmacist SP, to inform further research, policy and education.MethodsA review of the nursing and pharmacy SP literature from 1997 to 2007 was undertaken using searches of electronic databases, grey literature and journal hand searches.ResultsNurses and pharmacists were positive about SP but the medical profession were more critical and lacked awareness/understanding, according to the identified literature. SP was identified in many clinical settings but implementation barriers emerged from the empirical and anecdotal literature, including funding problems, delays in practicing and obtaining prescription pads, encumbering clinical management plans and access to records. Empirical studies were often methodological weaknesses and under-evaluation of safety, economic analysis and patients’ experiences were identified in empirical studies. There was a perception that nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing may supersede supplementary prescribing.ConclusionsThere is a need for additional research regarding SP and despite nurses’ and pharmacists’ enthusiasm, implementation issues, medical apathy and independent prescribing potentially undermine the success of SP.

AB - ObjectivesSupplementary prescribing (SP) represents a recent development in non-medical prescribing in the UK, involving a tripartite agreement between independent medical prescriber, dependent prescriber and patient, enabling the dependent prescriber to prescribe in accordance with a patient-specific clinical management plan (CMP). The aim in this paper is to review, thematically, the literature on nurse and pharmacist SP, to inform further research, policy and education.MethodsA review of the nursing and pharmacy SP literature from 1997 to 2007 was undertaken using searches of electronic databases, grey literature and journal hand searches.ResultsNurses and pharmacists were positive about SP but the medical profession were more critical and lacked awareness/understanding, according to the identified literature. SP was identified in many clinical settings but implementation barriers emerged from the empirical and anecdotal literature, including funding problems, delays in practicing and obtaining prescription pads, encumbering clinical management plans and access to records. Empirical studies were often methodological weaknesses and under-evaluation of safety, economic analysis and patients’ experiences were identified in empirical studies. There was a perception that nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing may supersede supplementary prescribing.ConclusionsThere is a need for additional research regarding SP and despite nurses’ and pharmacists’ enthusiasm, implementation issues, medical apathy and independent prescribing potentially undermine the success of SP.

KW - Nurse

KW - Pharmacist

KW - Supplementary prescribing

KW - Literature review

U2 - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.07.016

DO - 10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.07.016

M3 - Article

VL - 85

SP - 277

EP - 292

JO - Health Policy

JF - Health Policy

SN - 0168-8510

IS - 3

ER -