Tonna A P, Stewart D, West B, McCaig D
School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Social Care, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
J Clin Pharm Ther. 2007 Dec;32(6):545-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2710.2007.00867.x.
To review the research literature to date on pharmacist prescribing in the United Kingdom (UK) and to explore the main areas of care and practice settings including any benefits and limitations.
There are two models of pharmacist prescribing in the UK: pharma\cist supplementary prescribing (SP) introduced in 2003, involving a voluntary partnership between the responsible independent prescriber (a physician or a dentist), the supplementary prescriber and the patient, to implement an agreed patient-specific clinical management plan; and pharmacist independent prescribing (IP) introduced in 2006, responsible for the assessment and consequent management, including prescribing of both undiagnosed and diagnosed conditions. There have been narrative reports of pharmacist SP in different health care settings including primary care, community pharmacies, secondary care and at the primary/secondary care interface; published research within these areas of care is conflicting as to which setting is more suitable for pharmacist prescribing. Initial research reports that almost 50% of pharmacist supplementary prescribers self-reported prescribing with both benefits of and barriers to implementing SP. Research involving other healthcare professionals has indicated that encroachment of traditional roles is likely to occur because of the advent of pharmacist prescribing. A small-scale study has concluded that patients are likely to accept pharmacist prescribing favourably, with another study showing pharmacist prescribing leading to improved adherence to guidelines. There is no published research yet available about practices involving pharmacist IP.
Most of the literature focuses on pharmacists' perceptions of SP, with little information referring to other stakeholders, including patients. There is also limited published research focusing on clinical and economic outcomes of pharmacist SP.
This is a rapidly changing aspect of pharmacy practice in the UK, particularly with the more recent introduction of pharmacist IP. It is likely that this area of research will expand rapidly over the coming years.
回顾迄今为止关于英国药剂师处方权的研究文献,并探讨主要的护理领域和实践环境,包括任何益处和局限性。
英国有两种药剂师处方权模式:2003年引入的药剂师补充处方权(SP),涉及责任独立开方者(医生或牙医)、补充开方者和患者之间的自愿合作关系,以实施商定的针对特定患者的临床管理计划;以及2006年引入的药剂师独立处方权(IP),负责评估及后续管理,包括对未确诊和已确诊病症的开方。已有关于药剂师SP在不同医疗环境中的叙述性报告,包括初级护理、社区药房、二级护理以及初级/二级护理接口处;在这些护理领域发表的研究对于哪种环境更适合药剂师开方存在矛盾观点。初步研究报告称,近50%的药剂师补充开方者自我报告在实施SP时既有益处也有障碍。涉及其他医疗专业人员的研究表明,由于药剂师开方权的出现,传统角色的侵蚀可能会发生。一项小规模研究得出结论,患者可能会积极接受药剂师开方,另一项研究表明药剂师开方可提高对指南的依从性。目前尚无关于药剂师IP实践的已发表研究。
大多数文献关注药剂师对SP的看法,很少有信息涉及其他利益相关者,包括患者。关于药剂师SP的临床和经济结果的已发表研究也很有限。
这是英国药学实践中一个迅速变化的方面,特别是随着最近药剂师IP的引入。未来几年,这一研究领域可能会迅速扩展。