Time to Rethink the Funding Model for Home Medicines Review

Gilbert, Andrew L.

doi:10.1002/j.2055-2335.2014.tb00005.x

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A further impact of government policy as facilitator and constraint can be seen in several programs that have been funded in recent CPAs, and which have little or no research evidence to support them. This has been particularly apparent in the decision to fund CPS such as Medscheck, Diabetes Medscheck (in itself a much abbreviated version of DMAS) and Clinical Interventions, despite these services not being supported by any solid evidence for better health outcomes in the context of the Australian healthcare setting [ 32 ]. Although like HMR, these services were capped near the conclusion of the 5 th CPA, their introduction clearly demonstrates that evidence is not the only factor considered by policy makers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Funding for HMRs was initially allocated under the 3 rd CPA, however the increasing uptake of the services since 2002 has resulted in growth in demand significantly outstripping the funding allocation [ 31 , 32 ]. This was particularly evident during the 5 th CPA, when funding for HMRs was exhausted before the conclusion of the Agreement.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The operation of a Research and Development (R&D) program and its significance for practice change in community pharmacy

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundCommunity pharmacy practice in Australia is changing and Research and Development (R&D) in community pharmacy plays an important role in contributing to the changes. A range of Cognitive Pharmacy Services (CPS) were developed from R&D programs, yet their implementation has been minimal indicating slow practice change within community pharmacy. Given the vital role of R&D, little is known about the operation and the extent to which it has been effective in supporting practice change in community pharmacy.MethodsIn depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 27 key stakeholders in the pharmacy and healthcare system in Australia. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed ad verbatim and analysed using an inductive approach.ResultsParticipants perceived that the R&D program has played an important role in the advent of CPS. Furthermore, they considered that evidence generated by the R&D projects is a critical influence on policy formulation, funding and implementation of CPS into practice. However, policy decisions and subsequent implementation are also influenced by other factors associated with context and facilitation which in turn foster or inhibit effective Knowledge Translation (KT) in the community pharmacy sector.ConclusionWhile R&D programs have been viewed as essential for supporting changes in community pharmacy practice through development and funding of CPS, the overall impact has been small, as contemporary practice continues to be predominantly a dispensing model. Given the complexity and dynamic nature of the community pharmacy system, stakeholders must take into account the inter-relationship between context, evidence and facilitation for successful KT in community pharmacy practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%