Stakeholders’ views of UK nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing

Richard Cooper, Claire Anderson, Tony Avery, Paul Bissell, Louise Guillaume, Allen Hutchinson, Joanne Lymn, Elizabeth Murphy, Julie Ratcliffe, Paul Ward

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives:
Supplementary prescribing (SP) by pharmacists and nurses in the UK represents a unique approach to improving patients’ access to medicines and better utilizing health care professionals’ skills. Study aims were to explore the views of stakeholders involved in SP policy, training and practice, focusing upon issues such as SP benefits, facilitators, challenges, safety and costs, thereby informing future practice and policy.

Method:
Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 purposively sampled UK stakeholders, including pharmacist and nurse supplementary prescribers, doctors, patient groups representatives, academics and policy developers. Analysis of transcribed interviews was undertaken using a process of constant comparison and framework analysis, with coding of emergent themes.

Results:
Stakeholders generally viewed SP positively and perceived benefits in terms of improved access to medicines and fewer delays, along with a range of facilitators and barriers to the implementation of this form of non-medical prescribing. Stakeholders’ views on the economic impact of SP varied, but safety concerns were not considered significant. Future challenges and implications for policy included SP being potentially superseded by independent nurse and pharmacist prescribing, and the need to improve awareness of SP. Several potential tensions emerged including nurses’ versus pharmacists’ existing skills and training needs, supplementary versus independent prescribing, SP theory versus practice and prescribers versus non-prescribing peers.

Conclusion:
SP appeared to be broadly welcomed by stakeholders and was perceived to offer patient benefits. Several years after its introduction in the UK, stakeholders still perceived several implementation barriers and challenges and these, together with various tensions identified, might affect the success of supplementary and other forms of non-medical prescribing
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)215-221
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Health Services Research and Policy
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Pharmacists
Nurses
Interviews
Patient Advocacy
Safety
Economics
Delivery of Health Care
Costs and Cost Analysis

Cite this

Cooper, Richard ; Anderson, Claire ; Avery, Tony ; Bissell, Paul ; Guillaume, Louise ; Hutchinson, Allen ; Lymn, Joanne ; Murphy, Elizabeth ; Ratcliffe, Julie ; Ward, Paul. / Stakeholders’ views of UK nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing. In: Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2008 ; Vol. 13, No. 4. pp. 215-221.
@article{9141f3dc723241a38ed6149480bcf7b6,
title = "Stakeholders’ views of UK nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing",
abstract = "Objectives:Supplementary prescribing (SP) by pharmacists and nurses in the UK represents a unique approach to improving patients’ access to medicines and better utilizing health care professionals’ skills. Study aims were to explore the views of stakeholders involved in SP policy, training and practice, focusing upon issues such as SP benefits, facilitators, challenges, safety and costs, thereby informing future practice and policy.Method:Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 purposively sampled UK stakeholders, including pharmacist and nurse supplementary prescribers, doctors, patient groups representatives, academics and policy developers. Analysis of transcribed interviews was undertaken using a process of constant comparison and framework analysis, with coding of emergent themes.Results:Stakeholders generally viewed SP positively and perceived benefits in terms of improved access to medicines and fewer delays, along with a range of facilitators and barriers to the implementation of this form of non-medical prescribing. Stakeholders’ views on the economic impact of SP varied, but safety concerns were not considered significant. Future challenges and implications for policy included SP being potentially superseded by independent nurse and pharmacist prescribing, and the need to improve awareness of SP. Several potential tensions emerged including nurses’ versus pharmacists’ existing skills and training needs, supplementary versus independent prescribing, SP theory versus practice and prescribers versus non-prescribing peers.Conclusion:SP appeared to be broadly welcomed by stakeholders and was perceived to offer patient benefits. Several years after its introduction in the UK, stakeholders still perceived several implementation barriers and challenges and these, together with various tensions identified, might affect the success of supplementary and other forms of non-medical prescribing",
author = "Richard Cooper and Claire Anderson and Tony Avery and Paul Bissell and Louise Guillaume and Allen Hutchinson and Joanne Lymn and Elizabeth Murphy and Julie Ratcliffe and Paul Ward",
year = "2008",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008004",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "215--221",
journal = "Journal of Health Services Research and Policy",
issn = "1355-8196",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Sage UK: London, England",
number = "4",

}

Cooper, R, Anderson, C, Avery, T, Bissell, P, Guillaume, L, Hutchinson, A, Lymn, J, Murphy, E, Ratcliffe, J & Ward, P 2008, 'Stakeholders’ views of UK nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing', Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 215-221. https://doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008004

Stakeholders’ views of UK nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing. / Cooper, Richard; Anderson, Claire; Avery, Tony; Bissell, Paul; Guillaume, Louise; Hutchinson, Allen; Lymn, Joanne; Murphy, Elizabeth; Ratcliffe, Julie; Ward, Paul.

In: Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, Vol. 13, No. 4, 10.2008, p. 215-221.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Stakeholders’ views of UK nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing

AU - Cooper, Richard

AU - Anderson, Claire

AU - Avery, Tony

AU - Bissell, Paul

AU - Guillaume, Louise

AU - Hutchinson, Allen

AU - Lymn, Joanne

AU - Murphy, Elizabeth

AU - Ratcliffe, Julie

AU - Ward, Paul

PY - 2008/10

Y1 - 2008/10

N2 - Objectives:Supplementary prescribing (SP) by pharmacists and nurses in the UK represents a unique approach to improving patients’ access to medicines and better utilizing health care professionals’ skills. Study aims were to explore the views of stakeholders involved in SP policy, training and practice, focusing upon issues such as SP benefits, facilitators, challenges, safety and costs, thereby informing future practice and policy.Method:Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 purposively sampled UK stakeholders, including pharmacist and nurse supplementary prescribers, doctors, patient groups representatives, academics and policy developers. Analysis of transcribed interviews was undertaken using a process of constant comparison and framework analysis, with coding of emergent themes.Results:Stakeholders generally viewed SP positively and perceived benefits in terms of improved access to medicines and fewer delays, along with a range of facilitators and barriers to the implementation of this form of non-medical prescribing. Stakeholders’ views on the economic impact of SP varied, but safety concerns were not considered significant. Future challenges and implications for policy included SP being potentially superseded by independent nurse and pharmacist prescribing, and the need to improve awareness of SP. Several potential tensions emerged including nurses’ versus pharmacists’ existing skills and training needs, supplementary versus independent prescribing, SP theory versus practice and prescribers versus non-prescribing peers.Conclusion:SP appeared to be broadly welcomed by stakeholders and was perceived to offer patient benefits. Several years after its introduction in the UK, stakeholders still perceived several implementation barriers and challenges and these, together with various tensions identified, might affect the success of supplementary and other forms of non-medical prescribing

AB - Objectives:Supplementary prescribing (SP) by pharmacists and nurses in the UK represents a unique approach to improving patients’ access to medicines and better utilizing health care professionals’ skills. Study aims were to explore the views of stakeholders involved in SP policy, training and practice, focusing upon issues such as SP benefits, facilitators, challenges, safety and costs, thereby informing future practice and policy.Method:Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 43 purposively sampled UK stakeholders, including pharmacist and nurse supplementary prescribers, doctors, patient groups representatives, academics and policy developers. Analysis of transcribed interviews was undertaken using a process of constant comparison and framework analysis, with coding of emergent themes.Results:Stakeholders generally viewed SP positively and perceived benefits in terms of improved access to medicines and fewer delays, along with a range of facilitators and barriers to the implementation of this form of non-medical prescribing. Stakeholders’ views on the economic impact of SP varied, but safety concerns were not considered significant. Future challenges and implications for policy included SP being potentially superseded by independent nurse and pharmacist prescribing, and the need to improve awareness of SP. Several potential tensions emerged including nurses’ versus pharmacists’ existing skills and training needs, supplementary versus independent prescribing, SP theory versus practice and prescribers versus non-prescribing peers.Conclusion:SP appeared to be broadly welcomed by stakeholders and was perceived to offer patient benefits. Several years after its introduction in the UK, stakeholders still perceived several implementation barriers and challenges and these, together with various tensions identified, might affect the success of supplementary and other forms of non-medical prescribing

U2 - 10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008004

DO - 10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008004

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 215

EP - 221

JO - Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

JF - Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

SN - 1355-8196

IS - 4

ER -