ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2022
Evaluation of pharmacy value-added services in public health facilities: Staff perception and cost analysis.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pharmacy Value Added Services (VAS) were introduced in Malaysian public health facilities to facilitate the process of medicine collection. Examples include Drive-through pharmacy, Medicine by Post, SMS Take&Go, Appointment Card and medicine locker, commonly referred to as Medibox. Objectives: To assess the perception of VAS among pharmacy staff, and to compare the time and cost needed to prepare medications for VAS and conventional counter service. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 17 public health facilities across Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya from May until September 2020. There were two parts of this study: 1) a survey on the perception of VAS among pharmacy staff, which assessed respondents' experience of handling VAS and their perception towards the services; and 2) a cost analysis to compare the direct cost of preparing refill medications for VAS and conventional counter service, estimated from average salary and direct non-medical cost. Results: 290 respondents answered the survey. Most respondents had a positive opinion about VAS. Lack of storage and insufficient manpower were the top two barriers in VAS utilisation and implementation as perceived by pharmacy staff. The average time (in minutes) needed to prepare one prescription was highest for Medicine by Post service (10.31), followed by Medibox (10.25), Appointment Systems (6.24) and conventional counter service (3.99). Medibox had the highest average cost per prescription (RM5.49), followed by Medicine by Post (RM5.05), Appointment Systems (RM2.89) and conventional counter service (RM1.75). Conclusions: The majority of the respondents involved in this study acknowledged the benefits of VAS to patients, but there were aspects of the services that could be improved. Preparation of patient medication for VAS requires significantly more time and cost than conventional counter service, indicating the need to review and streamline implementation of the services.
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.