Community pharmacists' attitudes towards checking prescriptions: a cross-sectional survey
Files
Publication date
2024-10
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
cc_by_nc_nd
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The final prescription check is a mandatory but time-consuming process in Dutch community pharmacies. A safer dispensing process may have made the final prescription check obsolete. OBJECTIVE: To describe the final prescription check in Dutch community pharmacies and explore pharmacists' attitudes towards changing this. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch community pharmacists. The online questionnaire was based on literature and previous qualitative research, piloted in three pharmacies, and took 10 min to complete. Results were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 409 pharmacists participated. They saw the final prescription check as an important quality assurance of the dispensing process. Nevertheless, most pharmacists agreed that the final prescription check could be optimized as they thought that the time invested outweighed the benefits. Automation of the dispensing process, only checking selected high-risk prescriptions, and more in-process checks could reduce the need for an extensive final prescription check, rather than delegating the task to assistants. To implement changes, most pharmacists felt current dispensing guidelines needed to be adapted. CONCLUSION: There was a widespread consensus that optimizing the final prescription check could enhance efficiency and allow more time for person-centred care. Most pharmacists expressed a preference for updated guidelines before implementing such changes.
Keywords
clinical assessment, community pharmacy services, dispensing, drug prescriptions, final prescription check, pharmaceutical services, General Medicine
Citation
van Loon, W E, Lambert, M, Heringa, M, Bouvy, M L & Taxis, K 2024, 'Community pharmacists' attitudes towards checking prescriptions : a cross-sectional survey', The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 363-368. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riae030