Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30069668›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2018

Perceptions and current practices of community pharmacists regarding antimicrobial stewardship in Tasmania.

Tasneem Rizvi, Angus Thompson, Mackenzie Williams, Syed Tabish Razi Zaidi

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

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 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Bridging knowledge and practice: Antimicrobial Stewardship by community pharmacists in New Zealand.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tasneem RizviDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
Angus ThompsonDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
Mackenzie WilliamsDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
Syed Tabish Razi ZaidiDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Medicine, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia. s.t.r.zaidi@leeds.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Despite increasing interest in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), little is known about the related practices and perceptions of community pharmacists. Objective To develop and validate a questionnaire to measure the current practices of, and barriers to community pharmacists' participation in AMS. Setting Community pharmacists in Tasmania, Australia. Method A questionnaire to explore AMS knowledge, current practices and perceptions of community pharmacists was developed. It was designed after rigorous literature review, expert opinion, and feedback from a group of community pharmacists. A convenience sample of 140 Tasmanian community pharmacists was used for this study. Cronbach's alpha and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) were used for reliability and validity. The questionnaire was hosted online, a link to which was sent by invitation e-mails, fax and post to community pharmacists in Tasmania, Australia. Main outcome measure Current AMS practices, perceived importance, barriers and facilitators of AMS. Results Eighty-five pharmacists responded to the survey yielding a response rate of 61%. EFA identified one factor solution for each of three perceptions scales and showed acceptable reliability. The Cronbach's alpha of perceived importance-understanding was 0.699, perceived importance-motivating was 0.734, perceived support from GPs was 0.890, operational barriers was 0.585, general facilitators was 0.615. Most pharmacists reported that they counselled patients on adverse effects (86%), drug interactions (94%), and allergies (96%). In contrast, less than half (43%) intervened with prescribers regarding antibiotic selection. Lack of training, lack of access to patients' records, limited interactions with general practitioners and absence of a reimbursement model were major barriers limiting community pharmacists' participation in AMS. Conclusion The questionnaire was of acceptable reliability and validity; a larger study will further contribute in its reliability and validity. Future studies utilising the questionnaire at national and international level may provide further insights into the determinants of community pharmacist's involvement in AMS.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobial StewardshipAttitude of Health PersonnelCommunity Pharmacy ServicesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionPharmacistsProfessional RoleReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesTasmaniaAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntimicrobialAntimicrobial stewardshipAustraliaPerceptionPharmacistPracticeSurvey

Identifiers

PMID30069668
PMCPMC6208572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.