ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2025
Australian pharmacists' experiences and perspectives in implementing a chronic kidney disease screening service in community pharmacies: A qualitative study.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2025. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The emerging role of pharmacists in chronic kidney disease (CKD) care prompted the pharmacy-led screening and quality use of medicines in CKD trial (QUM-CKD), a pharmacy-led screening initiative to detect previously undiagnosed CKD and improve medication safety.Objective: To explore pharmacists' experiences and perspectives on the implementation of the QUM-CKD trial in Australian community pharmacies. Methods: A descriptive phenomenological qualitative approach was employed, involving in-depth, semi-structured telephone interviews with thirteen metropolitan and rural community pharmacists in the trial. Pharmacists were selected via purposive maximum variation sampling and were recruited mid-trial. Interviews were audio- recorded, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analysed using both deductive and inductive approaches in NVivo 14. Results: Most participating pharmacists reported having positive experiences with the trial's implementation. Facilitators of implementation included pharmacists' knowledge and beliefs, the availability of resources, support and training. The alignment with roles, values, and systems, along with perceived benefits of the service, the point-of-care testing service, a whole-team approach, and patient acceptance coupled with positive feedback, also facilitated implementation. Barriers included insufficient pharmacist staffing, time constraints, heavy workload, trial software and documentation issues, patients' lack of time, interest or unfavourable perceptions of the service, and interprofessional communication challenges between pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs). Pharmacists also suggested several potential improvements and expressed concerns about the sustainability of the service. Conclusions: Australian community pharmacists generally reported positive experiences in implementing the QUM-CKD trial. To ensure the service's success and sustainability, we recommend adequate pharmacy staffing, appropriate pharmacist remuneration, active stakeholder promotion and strong interprofessional collaboration. Pharmacists' suggestions for service improvement should also be considered.
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.