Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Robertson Wing 601H, 161 Cathedral Street, Glasgow, G40RE, Scotland.
Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, England, BA2 7AY, UK.
BMC Fam Pract. 2020 Nov 28;21(1):244. doi: 10.1186/s12875-020-01319-2.
The expansion of community pharmacy services is one solution to relieve pressure on general practice in the United Kingdom (UK). There is a paucity of research of general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives of quality of care in the community pharmacy sector. The purpose of this study was to explore GPs': Conceptualisation of quality for community pharmacy services, including the management of acute (low acuity) conditions and defining indispensable aspects of the patient experience ('always events') Opinions regarding whether and how to measure quality in the community pharmacy sector METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs in the UK. GPs were recruited using the snowballing technique and professional networks. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using an interpretive approach.
Interviews were completed with 20 GPs from Scotland (n = 8) and England (n = 12). Multidimensional and inter-related concepts of quality were identified; most dimensions related to patient benefit, as well as impact on GP workload or other health service provision. Interviewees cautioned that "what counts can't always be measured". GPs' expectations of quality often mirrored those of their own sector, but were ambivalent about the adoption of a quality outcome framework-type approach. Pharmacist involvement was expected to ensure quality in the management of 'acute consultations', however, GPs lacked awareness of community pharmacy personnel type, roles and training. Interviewees' perceptions of quality varied by pharmacy type; independent pharmacies were sometimes associated with higher quality service delivery than larger chain organisations.
Quality frameworks for community pharmacy services could be partly informed by GP experience and expectations, but need to be contextual to reflect differences between both settings. The importance of person-centred care, consistency and continuity was emphasised together with the need for competent personnel and privacy of interactions.
在英国，扩大社区药房服务是缓解全科医生压力的一种解决方案。关于全科医生对社区药房服务质量的看法，研究甚少。本研究旨在探讨全科医生对社区药房服务质量的看法，包括对急性（低严重度）病症的管理和确定患者体验不可或缺的方面（“始终发生”事件），以及他们对在社区药房部门衡量质量的看法，包括是否以及如何衡量质量。
对英国的全科医生进行半结构化访谈。使用滚雪球技术和专业网络招募全科医生。使用解释性方法对访谈进行录音、转录和分析。
在苏格兰（n=8）和英格兰（n=12）完成了 20 名全科医生的访谈。确定了多维且相互关联的质量概念；大多数维度都与患者受益以及对全科医生工作量或其他卫生服务提供的影响有关。受访者提醒说，“不能总是衡量有价值的东西”。全科医生对质量的期望往往与他们自己部门的期望相符，但对采用质量结果框架型方法持矛盾态度。人们期望药剂师的参与可以确保“急性咨询”管理的质量，但全科医生对社区药剂师人员类型、角色和培训缺乏了解。受访者对质量的看法因药房类型而异；与大型连锁组织相比，独立药房有时与更高质量的服务提供相关联。
社区药房服务的质量框架可以部分借鉴全科医生的经验和期望，但需要考虑到背景差异，反映出两者之间的差异。强调以患者为中心的护理、一致性和连续性的重要性，以及需要有能力的人员和互动的隐私。
