ObjectivesThe integration of community pharmacy services (CPSs) into primary care practice can be enhanced by assessing (and further addressing) the elements that enable (ie, facilitators) or hinder (ie, barriers) the implementation of such CPSs. These elements have been widely researched from the perspective of pharmacists but not from the perspectives of other stakeholders who can interact with and influence the implementation of CPSs. The aim of this study was to synthesise the literature on patients’, general practitioners’ (GPs) and nurses’ perspectives of CPSs to identify barriers and facilitators to their implementation in Australia.MethodsA meta-synthesis of qualitative studies was performed. A systematic search in PubMed, Scopus and Informit was conducted to identify studies that explored patients’, GPs’ or nurses’ views about CPSs in Australia. Thematic synthesis was performed to identify elements influencing CPS implementation, which were further classified using an ecological approach.ResultsTwenty-nine articles were included in the review, addressing 63 elements influencing CPS implementation. Elements were identified as a barrier, facilitator or both and were related to four ecological levels: individual patient (n=14), interpersonal (n=24), organisational (n=16) and community and healthcare system (n=9). It was found that patients, nurses and GPs identified elements reported in previous pharmacist-informed studies, such as pharmacist’s training/education or financial remuneration, but also new elements, such as patients’ capability to follow service's procedures, the relationships between GP and pharmacy professional bodies or the availability of multidisciplinary training/education.ConclusionsPatients, GPs and nurses can describe a large number of elements influencing CPS implementation. These elements can be combined with previous findings in pharmacists-informed studies to produce a comprehensive framework to assess barriers and facilitators to CPS implementation. This framework can be used by pharmacy service planners and policy makers to improve the analysis of the contexts in which CPSs are implemented.
Funding for this review was provided by the University of Technology Sydney Chancellor's Postdoctoral Fellowship awarded to Sabater-Hernández. No other potential conflict of interest was declared. Study concept and design were contributed by Sabater-Hernández, Fernandez-Llimos, Rotta, and Correr. Sabater-Galindo and Sabater-Hernández took the lead in data collection, along with Franco-Trigo and Rotta. Data interpretation was performed by Sabater-Hernández, Durks, and Lopes. The manuscript was written primarily by Sabater-Hernández, along with Hossain, and revised by Fernandez-Llimos, Rotta, and Benrimoj, with assistance from Durks, Sabater-Galindo, Franco-Trigo, and Correr.
The use of Intervention Mapping can provide health care planners with useful guidelines for the theoretical development of practice change interventions and programs.
This stakeholder analysis provided a detailed picture of the wide range of stakeholders across the entire health care system that have a stake in the development of a community pharmacy service aimed at preventing CVD. Of these, a core group of key stakeholders, with complementary roles, can then be approached for further planning of the service. The results of this analysis highlight the relevance of establishing multilevel stakeholder groups for CPS planning.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.