School of Pharmacy, Institute of Clinical Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, Canada.
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 2;16(2):e0246273. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246273. eCollection 2021.
Non-medical prescribing was introduced into the United Kingdom to improve patient care, but early research indicated a third of Allied Health Professionals may not use their prescribing qualification. A previous literature review, highlighting factors influencing prescribing, identified only papers with nursing and pharmacy participants. This investigation explored consensus on factors affecting physiotherapist and pharmacist non-medical prescribers. A three round Delphi study was conducted with pharmacist and physiotherapist prescribers. Round One comprised information gathering on facilitators and barriers to prescribing participants had experienced, and underwent content analysis. This was followed by two sequential consensus seeking rounds with participants asked to rate the importance of statements to themselves. Consensus criteria were determined a priori, including median, interquartile range, percentage agreement and Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance (W). Statements reaching consensus were ranked for importance in Round Three and analysed to produce top ten ranks for all participants and for each professional group. Participants, recruited October 2018, comprised 24 pharmacists and 18 physiotherapists. In Round One, content analysis of 172 statements regarding prescribing influences revealed 24 themes. 127 statements were included in Round Two for importance rating (barriers = 68, facilitators = 59). After Round Two, 29 statements reached consensus (barriers = 1, facilitators = 28), with no further statements reaching consensus following Round Three. The highest ranked statement in Round Three overall was: "Being able to prescribe to patients is more effective and really useful working [in my area]". Medical support and improved patient care factors appeared the most important. Differences were noted between physiotherapist and pharmacist prescribers regarding the top ten ranked statements, for example team working which pharmacists ranked higher than physiotherapists. Differences may be explained by the variety of practice areas and relative newness of physiotherapy prescribing. Barriers appear to be post or person specific, whereas facilitators appear universal.
非医疗处方在英国引入是为了改善患者护理,但早期的研究表明,三分之一的联合健康专业人员可能不会使用他们的处方资格。之前的文献综述强调了影响处方的因素,仅确定了与护理和药学参与者有关的论文。这项调查探讨了影响物理治疗师和药剂师非医疗处方者的因素的共识。对药剂师和物理治疗师处方者进行了三轮 Delphi 研究。第一轮包括参与者经历的促进和障碍因素的信息收集,并进行了内容分析。随后进行了两轮连续的共识寻求回合,要求参与者对自己的重要性进行评分。共识标准是预先确定的,包括中位数、四分位距、百分比协议和肯德尔协调系数 (W)。达到共识的陈述在第三轮进行了排名,并进行了分析,为所有参与者和每个专业组生成了十大排名。参与者于 2018 年 10 月招募,包括 24 名药剂师和 18 名物理治疗师。在第一轮中,对 172 条关于处方影响的陈述进行了内容分析,揭示了 24 个主题。在第二轮中,有 127 条陈述被纳入重要性评分(障碍=68,促进=59)。第二轮后,有 29 条陈述达成共识(障碍=1,促进=28),第三轮后没有进一步的陈述达成共识。第三轮整体排名最高的陈述是:“能够为患者开处方在我的领域更有效,也更有用”。医疗支持和改善患者护理的因素似乎是最重要的。物理治疗师和药剂师处方者在排名前十的陈述方面存在差异,例如药剂师比物理治疗师更看重团队合作。这种差异可能是由于实践领域的多样性和物理治疗处方的相对新颖性造成的。障碍似乎是特定于职位或特定于人的,而促进因素则是普遍的。