ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2024
Community pharmacy & primary care integration: qualitative study on stakeholders' opinions and interventions.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Implications Derived from Global Experiences of Barriers to Integrating Community Pharmacists into Primary Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health systems worldwide are under pressure. Integration seems a possible solution to improve healthcare systems efficiency. This research aims to gather stakeholders' opinions on integrating community pharmacy and the primary healthcare system and secondly to explore and prioritise interventions for an initial integration plan. Method: Using a constructivist qualitative research approach, a two-phase qualitative study was conducted in the Basque Country, Spain. Thematic analysis using NVivo® was undertaken on data gathered during focus groups and semi-structured interviews (phase 1). During phase 2, a nominal group prioritised potential integration interventions identified in phase 1. Results: The study amalgamated findings from four focus groups and nine interviews, revealing six themes. Stakeholders had a diverse understanding of integration, associating the term mainly with collaboration, communication or cooperation. Community pharmacies were positively perceived; however, their commercial and privately owned nature was of concern. Remuneration methods for pharmacists were controversial, with a suggested shift to service-based remuneration. Information availability and barriers such as interprofessional communication gaps were highlighted. The nominal group prioritised, according to importance and feasibility, bidirectional communication development, coordination in using interprofessional protocols and community pharmacist participation in primary healthcare centre meetings as interventions for integrating community pharmacies and primary healthcare centres. Conclusion: Based on the opinions of stakeholders, three interventions are proposed to initiate the integration process of community pharmacy and primary care. The implementation of these interventions will need to be negotiated with the relevant authorities and evaluated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.