ArticlePloS one2020
What is the attitude towards and the current practice of information exchange during self-medication counselling in German community pharmacies? An assessment through self-report and non-participant observation.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A qualitative non-participant observational study of non-prescription counseling in community pharmacies.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2025Article
- Simulated patient methodology as a "gold standard" in community pharmacy practice: Response to criticism.World journal of methodology · 2024Article
- Using the Simulated Patient Methodology in the Form of Mystery Calls in Community Pharmacy Practice Research: A Scoping Review Protocol.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Extent of Antibiotic Dispensing in Self-Medication Encounters in Sudan: A Simulated Patient Study Focusing on Cefixime Sale.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2023Article
- Community pharmacy professionals' practice in responding to minor symptoms experienced by pregnant women in Ethiopia: results from sequential mixed methods.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2022Article
- The Quality of Counseling for Headache OTC Medications in German Community Pharmacies Using a Simulated Patient Approach: Are There Differences between Self-Purchase and Purchase for a Third Party?TheScientificWorldJournal · 2022Article
- Polish Pharmacy Students' Readiness, Qualifications, Competences, Relevance, Motivation and Effectiveness to Promote Health in Community Pharmacies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Determinants of community pharmacists' information gathering and counseling practices during the management of minor ailments.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGuidelines encourage relevant information exchange between pharmaceutical staff and patients during self-medication consultation. Thereby, assessing the patient's situation and providing information is crucial for patient safety. So far, limited studies have investigated this information exchange, particularly in Germany. We aimed to assess the attitude towards and the current practice of guideline-recommended information exchange in German community pharmacies.
methodsIn total, twelve guideline-recommended parameters were predefined for gathering patient-related information and for the provision of information. These information exchange parameters were evaluated in two parts: Firstly, in a self-report of pharmaceutical staff via an online questionnaire to assess the reported importance, difficulty and frequency of the parameters as well as barriers to their implementation; secondly, in a non-participant observation in five pharmacies to evaluate the actual consultation practice.
resultsIn the self-report, all parameters were rated by more than 76% of 1068 participants as important. 'Concurrent medication' was determined to be the most difficult parameter to address (54%). All parameters of information gathering were rated to be addressed during routine counselling by at least 70% of the respondents. Parameters of information provision were all rated to be addressed by at least 45%. 'Lack of patient's interest' was identified as the most frequent barrier to appropriate counselling (84%). During the observation, the information gathering parameters were each addressed between 8 to 63% in the consultations, parameters of information provision between 3 to 34%.
conclusionDespite broad acceptance, the guideline parameters of information exchange were comparatively little addressed during the actual routine care. This might be due to a perceived 'lack of patient's interest' in counselling. Our results suggest to scrutinize whether patients are in fact not interested in counselling and to further explore how the positive intention of pharmaceutical staff towards information exchange can be further translated into everyday practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.