ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2021
Exploration of health professional stakeholders' views and experiences regarding minor ailments services' education, training and assessment.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Minor ailments services are structured pharmacy-based primary health care services that manage minor conditions. Limited training, education and assessment exists to promote the delivery of minor ailments services by pharmacy staff and it is unclear if the existing training and education processes meet professional requirements. Objective To explore the views and experiences of health professional stakeholders such as community pharmacists, intern pharmacists, medicines counter assistants and general medical practitioners with regards to minor ailments services education, training and assessment practices and preferences. Setting This study explored the views and experiences of health professional stakeholders in Australia. Method Semi-structured interviews were conducted, audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and then coded thematically using QSR Nvivo12. Main outcome measure Stakeholders' views and experiences regarding minor ailments services education, training and assessment practices and preferences. Results Twenty-eight interviews were conducted (community pharmacists n = 12; medicines counter assistants n = 4; intern pharmacists n = 9; general medical practitioners n = 3). Thematic analysis generated three themes: (1) pharmacy staff who require minor ailment service training; (2) acceptability and willingness to complete additional training; (3) learning preferences and approaches. Stakeholders reported considerations for the diverse roles in service delivery and fit for purpose tailored training. Conclusion Detailed practice guidelines may facilitate clarity of an individual staff member's role. Education and training in both clinical and non-clinical aspects of the service may be beneficial and may improve minor ailments service uptake and outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33125624What 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.