ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018
Pharmacist supply of sildenafil: pharmacists' experiences and perceptions on training and tools for supply.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning From Consultations Conducted by Community Pharmacists in Northern Ireland for Nonprescription Sildenafil: A Qualitative Study Using the Theoretical Domains Framework.Sexual medicine · 2021Article
- Visual Side Effects Linked to Sildenafil Consumption: An Update.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- Analysing the landscape for prescription to non-prescription reclassification (switch) in Germany: an interview study of committee members and stakeholders.BMC health services research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background In 2014, New Zealand reclassified sildenafil (for erectile dysfunction) to allow supply by specially trained pharmacists under strict criteria. Objective The study aimed to determine pharmacists' experiences and perspectives on the training for, and supply of sildenafil under this model. Setting New Zealand community pharmacy. Method This qualitative study captured data with a semi-structured interview used with purposively-sampled participants. A maximum variation sample was used to select a wide range of pharmacists working in various pharmacies, including pharmacists who were trained to provide sildenafil and those not trained to supply sildenafil. Consenting pharmacists were interviewed, with interviews audio-recorded and transcribed. Analysis used a framework approach. Main outcome measures Topics explored included: satisfaction and experience of the training; suitability and usability of the screening tools; experiences of the supply process and why some pharmacists chose not to become trained. Results Thirty-five pharmacists were interviewed. Training was seen as uncomplicated and the screening tools provided confidence that key consultation areas were covered. Most consultations reportedly took 15-20 min, some up to 60 min. Pharmacists reported being comfortable with the consultations. Many men requesting supply fell outside of the parameters, resulting in medical referral. This new model of supply was seen as a positive for pharmacists and their patients. Unaccredited pharmacists reported a perceived lack of interest from men, or ability to provide the service as reasons for not seeking accreditation. Conclusion New Zealand's model of pharmacist supply of sildenafil appears workable with some areas for improvement identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29605946What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.