Key result
Pharmacists were more inclined to monitor antihypertensive adherence by examining refill patterns than by questioning patients, with positive attitudes facilitating monitoring and time pressures acting as barriers.
Why the study?
It remained unclear whether monitoring antihypertensive adherence within community pharmacy workflow would be feasible, prompting an evaluation of facilitators and barriers at the point of repeat dispensing.
Cross-Sectional (n=258)
Pharmacist attitudes and normative beliefs facilitate antihypertensive adherence monitoring, but contextual time-barriers remain a significant obstacle in community pharmacy workflow.
Time pressures limit pharmacist discussions on antihypertensive adherence beliefs; hypothesis-generating for workflow interventions in community settings.
BACKGROUND: Community pharmacy represents an important setting to identify patients who may benefit from an adherence intervention, however it remains unclear whether it would be feasible to monitor antihypertensive adherence within the workflow of community pharmacy. The aim of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to monitoring antihypertensive medication adherence of older adults at the point of repeat dispensing. METHODS: We undertook a factorial survey of Irish community pharmacists, guided by a conceptual model adapted from the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). Respondents completed four sections, 1) five factorial vignettes (clinical scenario of repeat dispensing), 2) a medication monitoring attitude measure, 3) subjective norms and self-efficacy questions, and 4) demographic and workplace questions. Barriers and facilitators to adherence monitoring behaviour were identified in factorial vignette analysis using multivariate multilevel linear modelling, testing the effect of both contextual factors embedded within the vignettes (section 1), and respondent-level factors (sections 2-4) on likelihood to perform three adherence monitoring behaviours in response to the vignettes. RESULTS: Survey invites (n = 1543) were sent via email and 258 completed online survey responses were received; two-thirds of respondents were women, and one-third were qualified pharmacists for at least 15 years. In factorial vignette analysis, pharmacists were more inclined to monitor antihypertensive medication adherence by examining refill-patterns from pharmacy records than asking patients questions about their adherence or medication beliefs. Pharmacists with more positive attitudes towards medication monitoring and normative beliefs that other pharmacists monitored adherence, were more likely to monitor adherence. Contextual factors also influenced pharmacists' likelihood to perform the three adherence monitoring behaviours, including time-pressures and the number of days late the patient collected their repeat prescription. Pharmacists' normative beliefs and the number of days late the patient collected their repeat prescription had the largest quantitative influence on responses. CONCLUSIONS: This survey identified that positive pharmacist attitudes and normative beliefs can facilitate adherence monitoring within the current workflow; however contextual time-barriers may prevent adherence monitoring. Future research should consider these findings when designing a pharmacist-led adherence intervention to be integrated within current pharmacy workflow.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dillon et al. (2019) conducted a cross-sectional in Community pharmacists monitoring antihypertensive adherence (n=258). Contextual and respondent-level factors (e.g., time pressures, pharmacist attitudes) was evaluated on Likelihood to perform adherence monitoring behaviours (examine records, question adherence, discuss beliefs). Pharmacists were more inclined to monitor antihypertensive adherence by examining refill patterns than by questioning patients, with positive attitudes facilitating monitoring and time pressures acting as barriers.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: