Therefore this research, in addition to providing information to Australian policymakers regarding perceived pharmacists’ training requirements, could also be relevant to other countries AC220 in vitro planning to introduce expanded pharmacist prescribing. Evidence from the
UK has suggested that pharmacists undergoing supplementary prescribing training programmes have expressed concerns with the content of their training.[4, 21] Areas such as patient assessment and diagnosis, consultation skills and practical experience with physicians were valued in contrast to further education and training in pharmacology and pharmacokinetics.[4, 21] George et al. reported that training should place emphasis on evidence-based medicine, diagnosis and consultation
skills before independent prescribing was undertaken. Reactions from the UK non-medical prescribing courses indicate that the period of learning in practice and the input by designated medical practitioners has been rated highly by students.[23, 24] An Australian study assessed hospital pharmacists’ experiences with a UK non-medical prescribing course. This study reported an improvement in their communication and consultation skills, Lapatinib mw but identified concerns with the assessment requirements for the period of learning in practice. This highlighted the need for customisation of any prescribing course offered to Australian pharmacists.
This study aimed to explore pharmacists’ perceived training needs for expanded prescribing roles prior to undertaking any training for such roles. This included identifying perceived differences in pharmacists’ training requirements dependent on their experience as pharmacists, professional practice area and their expressed preference for prescribing according to either a find more supplementary or independent model or both. This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Curtin University, Western Australia. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire. A review of the relevant literature aided the initial construction of the questionnaire which was then pre-piloted on 114 pharmacists in Western Australia.[1-3, 11] The questionnaire had nine sections related to pharmacist prescribing including a section on training requirements. These sections consisted of 82 statements measuring pharmacists’ attitudes on a five-point Likert scale (from one = strongly agree, to five = strongly disagree) and three yes/no questions.