Due to the consistently high levels of agreement reached on competency statements and their associated descriptors, this competency framework should be used to direct education for undergraduate healthcare professionals, and those working in new clinical roles to support healthcare delivery where an understanding of, and engagement with, AMS is important. Although the competencies target basic education, they can also be used for continuing education.

ObjectiveTo (1) explore patients' expectations and experiences of nurse and pharmacist non-medical prescriber-led management of respiratory tract infections (RTIs), (2) examine whether patient expectations for antibiotics affect the likelihood of receiving them and (3) understand factors influencing patient satisfaction with RTI consultations.DesignMixed methods.SettingPrimary care.ParticipantsQuestionnaires from 120 patients and follow-up interviews with 22 patients and 16 nurse and pharmacist non-medical prescribers (NMPs).ResultsPatients had multiple expectations of their consultation with 43% expecting to be prescribed an antibiotic. There was alignment between self-reported patient expectations and those perceived by NMPs. Patient expectations for non-antibiotic strategies, such as education to promote self-management, were associated with receipt of those strategies, whereas patient expectations for an antibiotic were not associated with receipt of these medications. ‘Patient-centred’ management strategies (including reassurance and providing information) were received by 86.7% of patients. Regardless of patients' expectations or the management strategy employed, high levels of satisfaction were reported for all aspects of the consultation. Taking concerns seriously, conducting a physical examination, communicating the treatment plan, explaining treatment decisions and lack of time restrictions were each reported to contribute to patient satisfaction.ConclusionsNMPs demonstrate an understanding of patient expectations of RTI consultations and use a range of non-antibiotic management strategies, particularly those resembling a patient-centred approach. Overall, patients' expectations were met and prescribers were not unduly influenced by patient expectations for an antibiotic. Patients were satisfied with the consultation, indicating that strategies used by NMPs were acceptable. However, the lower levels of satisfaction among patients who expected but did not receive an antibiotic indicates that although NMPs appear to have strategies for managing RTI consultations, there is still scope for improvement and these prescribers are therefore an important group to involve in antimicrobial stewardship.

ObjectiveTo provide national consensus and establish priorities with regards to the factors that promote the implementation and continued development of non-medical prescribing within health services.DesignClassic e-Delphi survey.SettingNational study in Wales.ParticipantsPharmacists, nurses and allied health professionals with the independent/supplementary prescribing qualification.ResultsA total of 55 non-medical prescribers agreed to become members of the expert panel of whom 42 (76%) completed the round 1 questionnaire, 40/42 (95%) completed round 2 and 34/40 (85%) responded to round 3. Twenty-one statements were developed, and consensus was achieved on nine factors representing those necessary for the successful implementation of non-medical prescribing and five representing actions required for its continued development. Strategic fit between non-medical prescribing and existing service provision, organisation preparedness, visible benefits, good managerial and team support, and a clear differentiation of roles were each important influences.ConclusionGiven the high degree of consensus, this list of factors and actions should provide guidance to managers and commissioners of services wishing to initiate or extend non-medical prescribing. This information should be considered internationally by other countries outside of the UK wishing to implement prescribing by non-medical healthcare professionals.

Background:Management of chronic disease has become an increasing challenge to the National Health Service in the United Kingdom. The introduction of supplementary prescribing was seen as a possible mechanism to address the needs of this patient group. Individuals with mental illness were considered particularly suitable for management in this way.Objective:To explore the views and experiences of patients with mental illness on being managed by a pharmacist supplementary prescriber in a secondary care outpatient setting.Methods:A study of patient experiences utilising semi-structured interviews and self-completion diaries was adopted. Eleven patients participated in the study. Data were analysed utilising code and retrieve, and content analysis respectively.Results:Patients valued the increased accessibility to, and continuity of, their prescriber compared with their experience of other healthcare professionals. Patients reported they were able to trust the pharmacist’s knowledge of medication, were provided with sufficient information regarding reasons for treatment and side effects, and felt that they had an active role in decisions concerning their healthcare.Conclusions:This exploratory study showed that patients had positive views of being managed by a supplementary prescriber. However, it should be noted that the number of participants was small. It is therefore important that further, more wide ranging research is conducted to evaluate pharmacist prescribing within mental health settings.

This novel and innovative approach supports novice reflectors, encourages reflection on action and enhances professional development. It is a structured yet flexible tool, for which there was a gap in the published literature. It can be utilized in varied placements in pharmacy curricula internationally.