'Should I stay or should I go now?': A qualitative study of why UK doctors retire.

OBJECTIVES: Health care delivery and education face critical potential shortages in the foreseeable future in terms of retaining doctors nearing the time of retirement - doctors who have experience-based knowledge to pass onto the next generation. Retirement decisions are driven by a combination of macro-related, job and individual factors. This is a constantly shifting space; findings from earlier studies do not always help us understand the retirement decisions of contemporary cohorts of doctors. To address these issues, and identify new knowledge to inform approaches to retaining expertise, we aimed to identify and explore what may keep an older doctor in the workforce ('stay') factors and ('go') factors that might prompt retirement. METHODS: We invited doctors aged 50 years or over from diverse areas of Scotland to participate in qualitative, semi-structured interviews. Initial analysis of interview transcripts was inductive. The embeddedness theory of Mitchell et al encompassing the dimensions of 'link,' 'fit' and 'sacrifice,' was used for subsequent theory-driven analysis. RESULTS: A total of 40 respondents participated. In terms of 'link,' retiring could feel like a loss when work links were positive, whereas the opposite was true when relationships were poor, or peers were retiring. Considering 'fit,' intrinsic job satisfaction was high but respondents had less confidence in their own abilities as they grew older. However, the data foregrounded the inverse of the notion of Mitchell et al's 'sacrifice'; for UK doctors, staying in work can involve sacrifice because of tax penalties, work intensity and arduous demands. CONCLUSIONS: Retirement stay and go factors seem enmeshed in the cultural, social and economic structures of health care organisations and countries. Systems-level interventions that address ultimate causes, such as sufficient staffing, supportive systems, non-punitive taxation regimes and good working conditions are likely to be most effective in encouraging doctors to continue to contribute their knowledge and skills to the benefit of patients and learners.

What can discrete choice experiments do for you?

CONTEXT: In everyday life, the choices we make are influenced by our preferences for the alternatives available to us. The same is true when choosing medical education, training and jobs. More often than not, those alternatives comprise multiple attributes and our ultimate choice will be guided by the value we place on each attribute relative to the others. In education, for example, choice of university is likely to be influenced by preferences for institutional reputation, location, cost and course content; but which of these attributes is the most influential? An understanding of what is valued by applicants, students, trainees and colleagues is of increasing importance in the higher education and medical job marketplaces because it will help us to develop options that meet their needs and preferences. METHODS: In this article, we describe the discrete choice experiment (DCE), a survey method borrowed from economics that allows us to quantify the values respondents place on the attributes of goods and services, and to explore whether and to what extent they are willing to trade less of one attribute for more of another. CONCLUSIONS: To date, DCEs have been used to look at medical workforce issues but relatively little in the field of medical education. However, many outstanding questions within medical education could be usefully addressed using DCEs. A better understanding of which attributes have most influence on, for example, staff or student satisfaction, choice of university and choice of career, and the extent to which stakeholders are prepared to trade one attribute against another is required. Such knowledge will allow us to tailor the way medical education is provided to better meet the needs of key stakeholders within the available resources.

Determining cancer survivors' preferences to inform new models of follow-up care.

BACKGROUND: Specialist-led cancer follow-up is becoming increasingly expensive and is failing to meet many survivors' needs. Alternative models informed by survivors' preferences are urgently needed. It is unknown if follow-up preferences differ by cancer type. We conducted the first study to assess British cancer survivors' follow-up preferences, and the first anywhere to compare the preferences of survivors from different cancers. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment questionnaire was mailed to 1201 adults in Northeast Scotland surviving melanoma, breast, prostate or colorectal cancer. Preferences and trade-offs for attributes of cancer follow-up were explored, overall and by cancer site. RESULTS: 668 (56.6%) recipients (132 melanoma, 213 breast, 158 prostate, 165 colorectal) responded. Cancer survivors had a strong preference to see a consultant during a face-to-face appointment when receiving cancer follow-up. However, cancer survivors appeared willing to accept follow-up from specialist nurses, registrars or GPs provided that they are compensated by increased continuity of care, dietary advice and one-to-one counselling. Longer appointments were also valued. Telephone and web-based follow-up and group counselling, were not considered desirable. Survivors of colorectal cancer and melanoma would see any alternative provider for greater continuity, whereas breast cancer survivors wished to see a registrar or specialist nurse, and prostate cancer survivors, a general practitioner. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors may accept non-consultant follow-up if compensated with changes elsewhere. Care continuity was sufficient compensation for most cancers. Given practicalities, costs and the potential to develop continuous care, specialist nurse-led cancer follow-up may be attractive.

Physical disease and resilient outcomes: a systematic review of resilience definitions and study methods.

BACKGROUND: Findings from physical disease resilience research may be used to develop approaches to reduce the burden of disease. However, there is no consensus on the definition and measurement of resilience in the context of physical disease. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to summarize the range of definitions of physical disease resilience and the approaches taken to study it in studies examining physical disease and its relationship to resilient outcomes. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception to March 2013 for studies in which physical disease was assessed for its association with resilient outcomes. Article screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were carried out independently by 2 reviewers, with disagreements being resolved by a third reviewer. The results were combined using a narrative technique. RESULTS: Of 2280 articles, 12 met the inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 1 was of high quality, 9 were of moderate quality, and 2 were low quality. The common findings were that resilience involves maintaining healthy levels of functioning following adversity and that it is a dynamic process not a personality trait. Studies either assessed resilience based on observed outcomes or via resilience measurement scales. They either considered physical disease as an adversity leading to resilience or as a variable modifying the relationship between adversity and resilience. CONCLUSION: This work begins building consensus as to the approach to take when defining and measuring physical disease resilience. Resilience should be considered as a dynamic process that varies across the life-course and across different domains, therefore the choice of a resilience measure should reflect this.

Estimating the burden of minor ailment consultations in general practices and emergency departments through retrospective review of routine data in North East Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Minor ailment attendances in general practices and emergency departments (EDs) place significant burden on health care resources. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence and type of minor ailment consultations for adults in general practice and ED that could be managed in a community pharmacy. METHODS: Retrospective review of routine data from general practices (n = 2) and one ED in North East Scotland. Two independent consensus panels assessed each consultation summary to determine whether it represented a minor ailment. Outcomes included prevalence of consultations for minor ailments in general practice and ED and frequency of different minor ailment type that could be managed in community pharmacies. RESULTS: In total, of the 494 general practice and 550 ED consultations assessed, 13.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 18.6-25.9%] and 5.3% (95% CI: 4.0-8.0%), respectively, were categorized as minor ailments suitable for management in community pharmacies. Consensus among panel members was moderate for general practice consultations, but fair to poor for ED consultations. Agreement between uni- and multi-disciplinary panels was good. Applied to national data, these estimates would equate to ~18 million general practice and 6500000 ED consultations that could be redirected to community pharmacy, equating to ~£1.1 billion in resources. CONCLUSION: Minor ailment consultations still present a major burden on higher cost settings. Effective strategies are needed to raise awareness among patients and health professionals regarding conditions that can be managed effectively in pharmacies and to change patient health-seeking behaviour for such conditions.

Preferences for managing symptoms of differing severity: a discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: To design cost-effective health services it is important to understand why people adopt particular symptom management strategies. AIM: To establish the relative importance of factors that influence decision making when managing symptoms of differing severity, to establish how people trade between these factors, and to estimate the monetary value placed on different management types. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment. SETTING: UK online research panel. METHOD: Successive members of an online panel were invited to participate until 480 discrete choice experiment questionnaires were completed. Relative preferences for managing three symptom scenarios of varying severity were measured. Symptom management was described by three characteristics (management type, availability, and cost). Preferences for ways of managing symptoms were measured by using conditional logit analysis. RESULTS: A total of 98.5% of the completed questionnaires were valid (473 of 480 respondents). People preferred to manage minor symptoms by self-care or by visiting a pharmacy and were willing to pay £21.58 and £19.06, respectively, to do so. For managing moderately severe symptoms, people preferred to consult a general practitioner and were willing to pay £34.86 for this option. People preferred to manage potentially very severe symptoms by consulting a general practitioner and were willing to pay £73.08 to do so. Respondents were willing to trade between management types; options less preferred became more attractive when waiting time and cost were reduced. CONCLUSION: People value self-care, supported self-care, and general practitioner consultation differently depending on the type of symptoms. Manipulating costs to users and waiting times for different services could allow policymakers to influence the services people choose when managing symptoms.

Will the Public Engage with New Pharmacy Roles? Assessing Future Uptake of a Community Pharmacy Health Check Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacists are increasingly providing more clinically orientated services that focus on enhancing patient care and health promotion. However, little is known about how acceptable this is to the public. This study explored public preferences for a community pharmacy-based health check for cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: A convenience sample of 423 individuals was recruited (from a community pharmacy, a dental practice, a shopping centre, a university campus and a sports centre) to complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey administered face to face on a tablet. The DCE included six attributes: day of the week (weekday or weekends); way of accessing the service (walk-in and wait or by appointment); provider of health check (trainee pharmacist, pharmacist or nurse); duration of health check (30 or 45 min); follow-up phone call (no, yes and within 3 months); and cost (included to estimate the monetary value of health checks). Experimental design methods were used to create 12 choice tasks describing different health check services. Mixed logit (MXL) was used to analyse response data. RESULTS: Respondents had a preference for a community pharmacy-based CVD health check over no health check. They preferred a service provided (i) at the weekend; (ii) by appointment; (iii) by a nurse; (iv) for 30 min and (v) with follow-up after 3 months. Respondents were willing to pay £50 for this health check. CONCLUSION: Findings affirm the public's acceptance and value of a pharmacy-led CVD health check. The findings can inform pharmacy-based screening services before they are introduced, guide new service design and support resource allocation decisions.

Won't you stay just a little bit longer? A discrete choice experiment of UK doctors' preferences for delaying retirement.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Health systems around the world face difficulties retaining their workforce, which is exacerbated by the early retirement of experienced clinicians. This study aims to determine how to incentivise doctors to delay their retirement. METHODS: We used a discrete choice experiment to estimate the relative importance of job characteristics in doctors' willingness to delay retirement, and the number of extra years they were willing to delay retirement when job characteristics improved. 2885 British Medical Association members aged between 50 and 70 years, registered with the General Medical Council, practising in Scotland (in December 2019), and who had not started to draw a pension were invited. We compared the preferences of hospital doctors (HDs) and general practitioners (GPs). RESULTS: The response rate was 27.4% (n = 788). The number of extra years expected to work was the most important job characteristic for both respondents, followed by work intensity for GPs, whereas working hours and on-call were more important for HDs. Personalised working conditions and pension taxation were the least important characteristics for both groups. Setting all characteristics to their BEST levels, GPs would be willing to delay retirement by 4 years and HDs by 7 years. CONCLUSIONS: Characteristics related to the job rather than pension could have the greatest impact on delaying retirement among clinicians.

Using a discrete choice experiment to develop a decision aid tool to inform the management of persistent pain in pharmacy: a protocol for a randomised feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: In an era of personalised healthcare, it has become increasingly important to elicit individual-level preferences. While discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are widely used to measure patient preferences in the delivery of healthcare, the focus has been sample-level analysis. Using the DCE methodology, this project has designed a digital decision aid tool (DAT) with the potential to estimate individual preferences in real time to inform clinical consultation decisions in persistent pain management. METHODS: Using a feasibility randomised control trial, this study aims to assess the feasibility of using this Understanding Persistent Pain (UPP) DAT in a pharmacy-based clinical setting and to test processes for a future definite randomised trial. Community and practice-based pharmacists (up to 10) will be recruited in The National Health Service (NHS) Grampian and trained in the use of the digital UPP DAT. Pharmacists will recruit up to 60 patients who are living with persistent pain. Patients will be randomised to one of two groups: using the UPP DAT or usual care. Pharmacists will follow-up patients as needed according to clinical need and following standard practice. DCE response data collected by the UPP DAT will be analysed using the penalised logit model, allowing estimation of individual preferences in real time. We will follow-up pharmacists and patients who use the UPP DAT to gather feedback on their experiences. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received ethical approval from the North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (21/NS/0059) and received Research & Development Management Permission to proceed from NHS Grampian (2021UA003E). The study has been registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications, presentations and newsletters and made available in the University of Aberdeen and Pharmacy Research UK websites. Participants gave informed consent to participate in the study before taking part. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05102578; clinicaltrials.gov.

The Help for Hay Fever community pharmacy-based pilot randomised controlled trial for intermittent allergic rhinitis.

Management of intermittent allergic rhinitis (IAR) is suboptimal in the UK. An Australian community pharmacy-based intervention has been shown to help patients better self-manage their IAR. We conducted a pilot cluster RCT in 12 Scottish community pharmacies to assess transferability of the Australian intervention. Trained staff in intervention pharmacies delivered the intervention to eligible customers (n = 60). Non-intervention pharmacy participants (n = 65) received usual care. Outcome measures included effect size of change in the mini-Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (miniRQLQ) between baseline, 1-week and 6-week follow-up. Trial procedures were well received by pharmacy staff, and customer satisfaction with the intervention was high. The standardised effect size for miniRQLQ total score was -0.46 (95% CI, -1.05, 0.13) for all participants and -0.14 (95% CI,-0.86, 0.57) in the complete case analysis, suggesting a small overall treatment effect in the intervention group. A full-scale RCT is warranted to fully evaluate the effectiveness of this service.

Mode and Frame Matter: Assessing the Impact of Survey Mode and Sample Frame in Choice Experiments.

Background. Choice experiments (CE) are applied in health economics to elicit public preferences and willingness to pay (WTP). CEs are frequently administered as Internet-based surveys. Internet surveys have recognized advantages, but concerns exist about the representativeness of Internet samples, data quality, and the impact on elicited values. Aim. We conducted the first study in health comparing an Internet-based CE survey with the more traditional general population mail survey. We also compared the Internet-based and mail CE surveys with computer-assisted personal interviews (CAPIs), which are commonly used to elicit health state valuations. Methods. Two separate samples were drawn from 2 United Kingdom (UK) volunteer Internet panels (IPs), CAPIs were undertaken with respondents sampled from UK Census Output Areas, and mail surveys were sent to UK households drawn from the postcode address file (PAF). Each mode received more than 1000 respondents. We compared modes and frames using objective measures (response rate, sample representativeness of the UK population, elicited values, theoretical validity, and cost per response) and subjective/self-reported measures (time taken to complete the study, perceived study consequentiality, and stated attribute nonattendance). This study intentionally confounded the survey modes and sample frame by choosing sample frames that are typically used by researchers for each mode. Results. Estimated WTP differs across mode-frame pairs. On most measures, CAPIs dominated. They are more expensive, however. On all measures, except response rates, Internet surveys dominated the mail survey. They were also cheaper. Conclusion. Researchers using IPs should pay attention to response rates and be aware that the quality of IPs differs. Given the importance of perceived consequentiality and attribute attendance in CEs, future research should address their impact across modes and frames.

Do pharmacists contribute to patients' management of symptoms suggestive of cancer: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Limited awareness of cancer symptoms results in patient delay in seeking help and contributes to delay in diagnosis. Few UK studies have investigated the potential for community pharmacists to facilitate earlier detection of cancer. This study aimed to investigate what actions patients take to manage their early cancer symptoms, to identify the extent of current community pharmacy involvement and to consider the potential role for community pharmacists to facilitate appropriate management and appraisal of potential early cancer symptoms. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with lung, colorectal or gastro-oesophageal cancer in the preceding 12 months were identified during clinic visits by consultants. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, audio-recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed, using the Framework Approach. KEY FINDINGS: Twenty-five consenting patients were interviewed: two-thirds were male and more than half had lung cancer. Although all had experienced potential cancer symptoms prior to diagnosis, most underestimated seriousness and misattributed causation. Symptoms were managed by lifestyle changes and self-selecting medicines from local shops, supermarkets and pharmacies but without engaging with the pharmacist. CONCLUSIONS: For symptom management, participants self-selected medicines from community pharmacies, but pharmacy staff were rarely involved. Involving community pharmacists or their staff at the point of sale of these medicines might have facilitated earlier cancer diagnosis. Further research is needed to quantify how many patients with symptoms suggestive of cancer present in community pharmacies to understand if a pharmacist's role in facilitating symptom management and appraisal of potential cancer symptoms would be acceptable and effective, before developing any interventions.

The value of different aspects of person-centred care: a series of discrete choice experiments in people with long-term conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the value the patients place on different aspects of person-centred care. DESIGN: We systematically identified four attributes of person-centred care. We then measured their value to 923 people with either chronic pain or chronic lung disease over three discrete choice experiments (DCEs) about services to support self-management. We calculated the value of each attribute for all respondents and identified groups of people with similar preferences using latent class modelling. SETTING: DCEs conducted online via a commercial survey company. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with either chronic pain (two DCEs, n=517 and 206, respectively) or breathlessness due to chronic respiratory disease (n=200). RESULTS: Participants were more likely to choose services with higher level person-centred attributes. They most valued services that took account of a person's current situation likelihood of selection increased by 16.9% (95% CI=15.4 to 18.3) and worked with the person on what they wanted to get from life (15.8%; 14.5 to 17.1). More personally relevant information was valued less than these (12.3%; 11.0 to 13.6). A friendly and personal communicative style was valued least (3.8%; 2.7 to 4.8). Latent class models indicated that a substantial minority of participants valued personally relevant information over the other attributes. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to measure the value patients place on different aspects of person-centred care. Professional training needs to emphasise the substance of clinical communication-working responsively with individuals on what matters to them-as well as the style of its delivery.

It's not what you do it's the way that it's measured: quality assessment of minor ailment management in community pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: Effective management of minor ailments in community pharmacies could reduce the burden on alternative high-cost services (general practices, Emergency Departments). Evidence is needed regarding the appropriateness of management of these conditions in community pharmacies. OBJECTIVE: To explore the appropriateness of minor ailment management in community pharmacies. SETTING: Prospective, observational study of simulated patient (SP) visits to community pharmacies in Grampian (Scotland) and East Anglia (England). METHOD: Eighteen pharmacies (nine per centre) were recruited within a 25-mile radius of Aberdeen or Norwich. Consultations for four minor ailments were evaluated: back pain; vomiting/diarrhoea; sore throat; and eye discomfort. Each pharmacy received one SP visit per ailment (four visits/pharmacy; 72 visits total). Visits were audio-recorded and SPs completed a data collection form immediately after each visit. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Each SP consultation was assessed for appropriateness against product licence, practice guidelines and study-specific consensus standards developed by a multi-disciplinary consensus panel. RESULTS: Evaluable data were available for 68/72 (94.4%) visits. Most (96%) visits resulted in the sale of a product; advice alone was the outcome of three visits. All product sales complied with the product licence, 52 (76%) visits complied with practice guidelines and seven visits achieved a 'basic' standard according to the consensus standard. CONCLUSION: Appropriateness of care varied according to the standard used. Pharmacy-specific quality standards are needed which are realistic and relevant to the pharmacy context and which reflect legal and clinical guidelines to promote the safe and effective management of minor ailments in this setting.

Preferences for self-care or professional advice for minor illness: a discrete choice experiment.

AIM: To determine the relative importance of factors that influence decision making in the management of minor illness, and how people trade between these factors. DESIGN OF STUDY: Discrete choice experiment. SETTING: Scottish electoral roll. METHOD: Six hundred and fifty-two responders of a previous national survey were invited to complete a discrete choice experiment questionnaire. This was used to measure relative preferences for managing symptoms of minor illness often associated with analgesic use. Three attributes were identified as important to participants: type of management, availability, and cost of managing symptoms. Trade-offs between these attributes were examined. RESULTS: A 57% response rate was achieved (51% valid response rate). People preferred to manage symptoms by self-care and were willing to pay almost pounds 23 to do so. Community pharmacy was the preferred source of advice. Responders preferred less waiting time and paying less money when managing symptoms, and were willing to trade between factors. A less preferred type of management became more attractive when waiting times and cost were reduced. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that self-care is the preferred method of managing symptoms of minor illness. When developing services to support self-care, policy makers should invest in services that reduce waiting times and incur least cost to users.

Managing Minor Ailments; The Public's Preferences for Attributes of Community Pharmacies. A Discrete Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Demand for health services continues to rise. Greater use of community pharmacy services instead of medical services for minor ailments could help relieve pressure on healthcare providers in high-cost settings. Community pharmacies are recognised sources of treatment and advice for people wishing to manage these ailments. However, increasing the public's use of pharmacy services may depend on attributes of pharmacies and their staff. This study aimed to determine the general public's relative preferences for community pharmacy attributes using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). METHOD: A UK-wide DCE survey of the general public was conducted using face-to-face computer-assisted personal interviews. Attributes and levels for the DCE were informed by a literature review and a cohort study of community pharmacy customers. The context for the experiment was a minor ailment scenario describing flu-like symptoms. The DCE choice sets described two hypothetical community pharmacy services; respondents were asked to choose which (if either) of the two pharmacies they would prefer to help them manage symptoms. Data from 1,049 interviews were analysed using an error components logit model. Willingness to pay (WTP), a monetary measure of benefit, was estimated for the different attribute levels. RESULTS: When seeking help or treatment for flu-like symptoms, respondents most valued a pharmacy service that would improve their understanding and management of symptoms (WTP = £6.28), provided by staff who are trained (WTP (pharmacist) = £2.63: WTP(trained assistant) = £3.22), friendly and approachable (WTP = £3.38). Waiting time, pharmacy location and availability of parking also contributed to respondents' preferences. WTP for a service comprising the best possible combination of attributes and levels was calculated as £55.43. CONCLUSION: Attributes of a community pharmacy and its staff may influence people's decisions about which pharmacy they would visit to access treatment and advice for minor ailments. In line with the public's preferences, offering community pharmacy services that help people to better understand and manage symptoms, are provided promptly by trained staff who are friendly and approachable, and in a local setting with easy access to parking, has the potential to increase uptake amongst those seeking help to manage minor ailments. In this way it may be possible to shift demand away from high-cost health services and make more efficient use of scarce public resources.

Resilience of primary healthcare professionals: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Modern demands and challenges among healthcare professionals can be particularly stressful and resilience is increasingly necessary to maintain an effective, adaptable, and sustainable workforce. However, definitions of, and associations with, resilience have not been examined within the primary care context. AIM: To examine definitions and measures of resilience, identify characteristics and components, and synthesise current evidence about resilience in primary healthcare professionals. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review was undertaken to identify studies relating to the primary care setting. METHOD: Ovid(®), Embase(®), CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases were searched in December 2014. Text selections and data extraction were conducted by paired reviewers working independently. Data were extracted on health professional resilience definitions and associated factors. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria: eight were quantitative, four qualitative, and one was an intervention study. Resilience, although multifaceted, was commonly defined as involving positive adaptation to adversity. Interactions were identified between personal growth and accomplishment in resilient physicians. Resilience, high persistence, high self-directedness, and low avoidance of challenges were strongly correlated; resilience had significant associations with traits supporting high function levels associated with demanding health professional roles. Current resilience measures do not allow for these different aspects in the primary care context. CONCLUSION: Health professional resilience is multifaceted, combining discrete personal traits alongside personal, social, and workplace features. A measure for health professional resilience should be developed and validated that may be used in future quantitative research to measure the effect of an intervention to promote it.

Self-care behaviour for minor symptoms: can Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use help us to understand it?

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use can aid understanding of self-care behaviour and inform development of interventions to promote self-care for minor illness. METHOD: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 Scottish participants about their experience and management of minor symptoms normally associated with analgesic use. Synthesised data from the interviews were mapped onto the Behavioral Model. KEY FINDINGS: All factors identified as influencing decisions about how to manage the symptoms discussed, mapped onto at least one domain of Andersen's model. Individual characteristics including beliefs, need factors and available resources were associated with health behaviour, including self-care. Outcomes such as perceived health status and consumer satisfaction from previous experience of managing symptoms also appeared to feed back into health behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: The Behavioral Model seems relevant to self-care as well as formal health services. Additional work is needed to explore applicability of the Behavioral Model to different types of symptoms, different modalities of self-care and in countries with different health care systems. Future quantitative studies should establish the relative importance of factors influencing the actions people take to manage minor symptoms to inform future interventions aimed at optimising self-care behaviour.

Electronic transfer of prescription-related information: comparing views of patients, general practitioners, and pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) intends to introduce a system of electronic transfer of prescription-related information between general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacies. The NHS Plan describes how this will be achieved. AIM: To gather opinions of patients, GPs, and community pharmacists on the development of a system of electronic transfer of prescription-related information between GPs and community pharmacies. DESIGN OF STUDY: Survey combining interviews, focus groups, and postal questionnaires. SETTING: General practitioners, opinion leaders, computing experts, pharmacists, and patients. Eight hundred members of the public, 200 GPs, and 200 community pharmacists, all living in Scotland. METHOD: Content-setting interviews and focus groups were conducted with purposive samples of relevant groups. Postal questionnaires were developed and sent to random samples of members of the public selected from the electoral roll, GPs, and community pharmacists. RESULTS: The corrected postal response rates were: 69% (patients); 74% (GPs); and 74% (community pharmacists). All three groups were generally supportive of electronic transfer of prescription-related information. Different aspects appealed to each group: patients anticipated improved convenience; GPs, better repeat prescribing; and pharmacists, an enhanced professional role. Security of patient-identifiable information was the main concern. All groups acknowledged potential benefits of a full primary care information system, but GPs and patients had reservations about allowing community pharmacists to access parts of the medical record that did not concern medication. CONCLUSION: Electronic transfer of prescription-related information is likely to be acceptable to all users, but concerns about patient confidentiality and an extended role for pharmacists in prescription management need to be addressed.

Screening for major diseases in community pharmacies: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the published evidence about the feasibility and acceptability of community pharmacy-based screening for major diseases. METHOD: Studies published between January 1990 and August 2012 involving community pharmacy-based screening interventions, published in the English language, were identified from electronic databases. Reference lists of included studies were also searched. KEY FINDINGS: Fifty studies (one randomised controlled trial, two cluster randomised studies, five non-randomised comparative studies and 42 uncontrolled studies) were included. The quality of most of these was assessed as poor. Screening was mostly opportunistic and screening tools included questionnaires or risk assessment forms, medical equipment to make physiological measurements, or a combination of both. Few studies assessed the accuracy of pharmacy-based screening tools. More than half of the screening interventions included an element of patient education. The proportion of screened individuals, identified with disease risk factors or the disease itself, ranged from 4% to 89%. Only 10 studies reported any economic information. Where assessed, patient satisfaction with pharmacy-based screening was high, but individuals who screened positive often did not follow pharmacist advice to seek further medical help. CONCLUSION: Available evidence suggests that screening for some diseases in community pharmacies is feasible. More studies are needed to compare effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pharmacy-based screening with screening by other providers. Strategies to improve screening participants' adherence to pharmacist advice also need to be explored. This systematic review will help to inform future studies wishing to develop community pharmacy-based screening interventions.