Skip to main content
Log in

Exploring the supply of non-prescription medicines from community pharmacies in Scotland

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Pharmacy World & Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective The objectives of this study were to: (1) explore pharmacy support staff (PSS) opinions of and attitudes towards the supply of non-prescription medicines (NPMs); (2) assess whether NPM supply is compliant with professional and good practice guidelines. Methods This exploratory study was conducted in community pharmacies in Grampian, Scotland, and comprised non-participant observation of NPM consultations, semi-structured interviews with, and a questionnaire of, PSS. Guideline compliance was assessed by a consensus group of practising community pharmacists. Main outcome measures The percentage of consultations which achieved compliance with professional guidelines was calculated. A total score was also calculated for each consultation to assess compliance with good practice guidelines. Results Fifty-seven support staff from 21 pharmacies participated in at least one component of the study. In total, 195 observed consultations were evaluable. Fifty-four participants completed a questionnaire and 95 post-consultation interviews were completed. Most consultations involved product requests and were for self-treatment. Overall, interviewees were satisfied or very satisfied with 78 (83.0%) and 14 (14.9%) of all consultations, respectively. Participants’ self-reported scores for the quality of consultation were high indicating that they perceived their consultations to be appropriate. Most PSS were aware of good practice guidelines and thought their use was important/very important, yet few consultations were fully guideline compliant. Non-product consultations were more guideline compliant than product consultations. Just over one third (35.6%) of consultations established whether other medication was being used by the intended recipient of the NPM. Few PSS (21.2%) had read the professional guidelines and as such, compliance with these guidelines was extremely low. The percentage of guideline compliant consultations were 6.6% (n = 5) (sufficient information gathered), 13.2% (n = 10) (adequate advice/information provision), 46.1% (n = 35) (personal involvement of pharmacist), 21.1% (n = 16) (particular care of specific patient groups) and 28.9% (n = 22) (pharmacist involvement with specific NPMs). Conclusion Few consultations for NPMs in this study were fully guideline compliant. The reasons for non-compliance with good practice and professional guidelines need to be explored. Although failure to comply with professional guidelines could be due to PSS’s lack of awareness, this does not explain non-compliance with good practice guidelines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Kappa can only be calculated when there is variation between two ratings i.e. along the diagonal. When no variation occurs, Kappa cannot be calculated.

References

  1. Blenkinsopp A, Bond CM. Over-the-counter medication. London: BMA; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Bibliography: prescription only medicines reclassified to pharmacy only medicines. London: RPSGB; 2004 October.

  3. Flint J. Training requirements for medicines counter assistants. Pharm J 1996;256:858–9.

    Google Scholar 

  4. NPA launches training with a W-WHAM. Pharm J 1989;243(July 8th):40.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Medicines, Ethics and Practice. London: RPSGB; 2005. Report No: 29 (ISBN:0-85369-630-6).

  6. Department of Health. Self care—a real choice. London: Department of Health; 2005. Report No: 266322.

  7. Shi C, Gralnek IM, Dulai GS, Towfigh A, Asch S. Consumer usage patterns of nonprescription histamine2-receptor antagonists. Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99(4):606–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ferris D, Nyirjesy P, Sobel J, Soper D, Pavletic A, Litaker M. Over-the-counter antifungal drug misuse associated with patient-diagnosed vulvovaginal candidiasis. Obstet Gynaecol 2002;99(3):419–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sihvo S, Klaukka T, Martikainen J, Hemminki E. Frequency of daily over-the-counter drug use and potential clinically significant over-the-counter-prescription drug interactions in the Finnish adult population. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000;56:495–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Watson MC, Bond CM, Grimshaw JM, Mollison J, Ludbrook A, Walker A. Educational strategies to promote evidence-based community pharmacy practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT). Fam Pract 2002;19:529–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Roumie CL, Griffin MR. Over-the-counter analgesics in older adults. Drugs Aging 2004;21(8):1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Watson MC, McCloughan L. How the Scottish School of Primary Care can help pharmacists. Pharm J 2004;272(7282):63–4.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Altman D. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991 (ISBN: 0-412-27630-5).

  14. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1991;50:179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Green M. How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis? Multivariate Behav Res 1991;26(3):499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Watson MC, Bond CM. The evidence based supply of non-prescription medicines: barriers and beliefs. IJPP 2004;12(June):65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Last JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995. p. 81.

    Google Scholar 

  18. John DN, Krska J, Hansford D. Are customers requesting medicines by name less likely to be advised or referred? Provision of over-the-counter H2-receptor antagonists and alginate products from pharmacists. Int J Pharm Pract 2003;11:33–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Berger K, Eickhoff C, Schulz M. Counselling quality in community pharmacies: implementation of the pseudo customer methodology in Germany. J Clin Pharm Ther 2005;30:45–57.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Benrimoj SI, Gilbert AL. A program to develop and test a mechanism to raise national standards of practice for the provision of pharmacist only and pharmacy medicines in Australian community pharmacy. Sydney: University of Sydney; 2002 April.

  21. Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. Standards for the provision of pharmacist only and pharmacy medicines in community pharmacy. Australia; 1999.

  22. Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Developing and implementing standard operating procedures for dispensing (SOPs). London: RPSGB; 2001. (www.rpsgb.org.uk/pdfs/sops.pdf).

  23. Watson MC, Bond CM, Johnston M, Mearns K. Using human error theory to explore the supply of non-prescription medicines from community pharmacies. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:244–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Prayle D, Brazier M. Supply of medicines: paternalism, autonomy and reality. J Med Ethics 1998;24:93–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Pilnick A. ‘Why didn’t you say just that?’ Dealing with issues of asymmetry, knowledge and competence in the pharmacist/client encounter. Sociol Health Illn 1998;20(1):29–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sleath B. Pharmacist-patient relationships: authoritarian, participatory, or default? Patient Educ Coun 1996;28:253–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Westerlund T, Andersson I, Marklund B. The quality of self-care counselling by pharmacy practitioners, supported by IT-based clinical guidelines. PWS 2007;29:67–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vainio K, Airaksinen M, Hyykky T, Enlund K. Effect of therapeutic class on counseling in community pharmacies. Ann Pharmacother 2002;36(5):781–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Emmerton L, Shaw J. The influence of pharmacy staff in non-prescription medicine sales. Int J Pharm Pract 2002;10:101–6.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Norris P. Which sort of pharmacies provide more patient counselling? J Health Serv Res Policy 2002;7(Supplement 1):23–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tully M, Hassell K, Noyce P. Advice-giving in community pharmacies in the UK. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2(1):38–50.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Banks J, Shaw A, Weiss MC. Walking a line between health care and sales: the role of the medicines counter assistant. Pharm J 2005;274(7349):586–9.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bond C, Hannaford P. Issues related to monitoring the safety of over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. Drug Saf 2003;26(15):1065–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Watson M, Bond CM, Grimshaw JM, Johnston M. Factors predicting the guideline compliant supply (or non-supply) of non-prescription medicines in the community pharmacy setting. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:53–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all the PSS who participated in this study. We are particularly grateful to Ms S. Campbell, Co-ordinator for the Northern Node for the Scottish Professionals and Practices Involved in Research (SPPIRe), who assisted in the recruitment of pharmacies for this study.

Funding

MW was funded by a Medical Research Council (UK) Special Training Fellowship in Health Services Research.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Margaret C. Watson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Watson, M.C., Hart, J., Johnston, M. et al. Exploring the supply of non-prescription medicines from community pharmacies in Scotland. Pharm World Sci 30, 526–535 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-008-9202-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-008-9202-y

Keywords

Navigation