Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Context Some studies that have used “pseudo-patron” methods have provided the basis for criticism of pharmacists' performance and have stigmatised these methods in pharmacy research. Objective To test and refine the use of pseudo-patron methodology, with feedback to practitioners, as a means of implementing behaviour change. Method In the studies reported in this paper practice behaviour was shaped by conducting a workshop and then providing ongoing training in the form of feedback and coaching immediately after a pseudo-patron visit. The involvement of pseudo-patrons was negotiated with pharmacists and their staff and embedded within their professional development. Results An initial study showed that, compared with controls, pseudo-patron trained pharmacists were significantly more likely to identify off-label (not in accordance with label specifications) analgesic use (P<0.01) and were more likely to discuss the use of alternatives (P<0.02). The methodology was refined and in a subsequent study pharmacists were even more likely to identify misuse (P<0.001), assess readiness to change (P<0.001) and deliver an appropriate intervention (P<0.001). Conclusions The results of the studies presented in this paper demonstrate that the inclusion of pseudo-patron visits in pharmacist training is feasible and that a combination of workshops and performance feedback, including positive and corrective elements, can produce substantial protocol adherence in the natural setting. The use of pseudo-patron methods as part of a training programme is effective in shaping behaviour of pharmacists and pharmacy assistants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Neto et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: