Pharmacy-based pre-exposure prophylaxis support among pharmacists and men who have sex with men

ObjectiveTo understand the perceptions and support for pharmacy-based pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery among pharmacists and men who have sex with men (MSM).DesignA qualitative study from April 2017 to December 2018.Setting and participantsThe researchers used purposive sampling to identify MSM participants and AIDSVu to identify pharmacists in high–human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) zip codes in the metropolitan Atlanta area. Eight MSM and 6 pharmacists consented to participate in the study.Outcome measuresPerceptions and support for PrEP delivery in pharmacies.ResultsBoth MSM and pharmacists expressed strong support for in-pharmacy PrEP screening and dissemination. MSM reported that pharmacies were more convenient and accessible compared with physician’s offices. However, they also noted that privacy and training of pharmacy staff were important for them to consider being screened for PrEP in a pharmacy. Pharmacists also believed training was important and felt comfortable counseling on HIV prevention for their current patients.ConclusionThese data support early evidence that pharmacies are a promising venue to improve PrEP access for MSM. To implement PrEP screening in pharmacies, proper training of pharmacy staff and a designated space to ensure privacy are critical. Future studies should test the feasibility of screening for PrEP in pharmacies for black MSM.     

Pharmacists’ experiences with a statewide naloxone standing order program in Massachusetts: a mixed methods study

ObjectivesIn a prior statewide naloxone purchase trial conducted in Massachusetts, we documented a high rate of naloxone dispensing under the state’s standing order program. The purpose of this study was to understand the factors that facilitate naloxone access under the Massachusetts naloxone standing order (NSO) program and identify any remaining barriers amenable to intervention.DesignMixed methods design involving a pharmacist survey and 3 pharmacist focus groups.Setting and participantsFocus groups were conducted at 3 separate professional conferences for pharmacists (n = 27). The survey was conducted among Massachusetts pharmacists (n = 339) working at a stratified random sample chain and independent retail pharmacies across Massachusetts. All data were collected between September 2018 and November 2019.Outcome measuresFacilitators and barriers to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing and pharmacists’ attitudes and beliefs regarding naloxone and opioid use.ResultsMost pharmacists described NSO implementation as being straightforward, although differences were reported by pharmacy type in both the survey and focus groups. Facilitators included centralized implementation at chain pharmacies, access to Web-based resources, regularly stocking naloxone, and use of naloxone-specific intake forms. Barriers included patient confidentiality concerns and payment/cost issues. Only 31% of surveyed pharmacists reported always providing naloxone counseling; the most commonly cited barriers were perceived patient discomfort (21%) and time limitations (14%). Confidential space was also more of a concern for independent (vs. chain) pharmacists (18% vs. 6%, P = 0.008). A majority of pharmacists held supportive attitudes toward naloxone, although some reported having moral/ethical concerns about naloxone provision.ConclusionWe documented several facilitators to NSO implementation and naloxone dispensing. Areas for improvement include addressing stigma and misconceptions around opioids and naloxone use. These remain important targets for improving pharmacy-based naloxone dispensing, although our overall positive results suggest Massachusetts’ experience with NSO implementation can inform other states’ efforts to expand pharmacy-based naloxone access.     

Strategies for implementing the Appointment-Based Model at a rural independent chain of community pharmacies

BackgroundThe Appointment-Based Model (ABM) is a care model that helps community pharmacists streamline their medication dispensing workflow while simultaneously integrating patient care into the medication preparation process through medication synchronization. Implementation of the ABM has varied across community pharmacies. Further studies that identify tailored implementation approaches are needed to support broad adoption of the ABM in practice.Objectives(1) To determine facilitators and barriers to ongoing adoption and implementation of the ABM at a small chain of rural independent pharmacies where adoption has stalled and (2) to identify implementation strategies to support further adoption of the ABM at these pharmaciesMethodsThis project was an exploratory, mid-implementation study. Semistructured interviews were conducted with pharmacy staff who participated in the ongoing implementation and use of the ABM at the pharmacies. Interviews elicited stakeholder-centered perspectives on (1) experiences with the ABM to date, (2) processes and roles for the ABM, and (3) opinions on how implementation of the ABM could be improved at the pharmacies. Rapid qualitative assessment methodology was used for analysis to identify facilitators and barriers and to select implementation strategies.ResultsThirty-one pharmacy personnel were interviewed: pharmacists (n = 10), pharmacy technicians (n = 7), and fill clerks (n = 14). The research team identified 6 facilitators and 4 barriers to the implementation of the ABM at the pharmacies. Five implementation strategies were selected based on the facilitators and barriers: (1) capture and share local knowledge across pharmacy sites, (2) conduct educational outreach visits, (3) conduct ongoing training, (4) prepare patients to be active participants in the ABM, and (5) organize clinician implementation team meetings.ConclusionsDevelopment of a stakeholder-driven implementation approach may support further implementation and adoption of the ABM in practice.     

Attitudes and availability: A comparison of naloxone dispensing across chain and independent pharmacies in rural and urban areas in Alabama

BackgroundFatal opioid overdoses remain the leading cause of accidental deaths in the United States, which have contributed to implementation of standing order laws that allow pharmacists to dispense naloxone to patients. Although pharmacy distribution of naloxone is a promising approach to increase access to this intervention, understanding barriers preventing greater uptake of this service is needed.MethodsData for the current study were collected via telephone survey assessing the availability of various formulations of naloxone at chain and independent pharmacies in rural and urban areas in Birmingham, Alabama (N = 222). Pharmacists’ attitudes toward naloxone and potential barriers of pharmacy naloxone distribution were also assessed. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine differences in stocking of naloxone in chain and independent pharmacies and to determine predictors of the number of kits dispensed by pharmacies.ResultsIndependent pharmacies were less likely to have naloxone in stock, especially those in rural areas. Furthermore, rural pharmacies required more time to obtain all four formulations of naloxone, and offered less extensive training on naloxone use. Pharmacists endorsing the belief that naloxone allows avoidance of emergent treatment in an overdose situation was associated with fewer dispensed kits by the pharmacies. Over 80% of pharmacists endorsed at least one negative belief about naloxone (e.g., allowing riskier opioid use). Pharmacists noted cost to patients and the pharmacy as contributing to not dispensing more naloxone kits.ConclusionThe current study demonstrates the lower availability of naloxone stocked at pharmacies in independent versus chain pharmacies, particularly in rural communities. This study also highlights several barriers preventing greater naloxone dispensing including pharmacists’ attitudes and costs of naloxone. The potential benefit of standing order laws is not being fully actualized due to the structural and attitudinal barriers identified in this study. Strategies to increase naloxone access through pharmacy dispensing are discussed.     

Community pharmacy delivered PrEP to STOP HIV transmission: An opportunity NOT to miss!

In the United States, 1.1 million persons are living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and approximately 37,800 new infections occur annually. Ending the HIV epidemic requires reducing HIV transmissions by 90% within the next 10 years and requires expanded HIV testing, antivirals for persons infected with HIV, and scale-up of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) to prevent new infections. Community pharmacies are widely accessible and employ highly trained health care professionals on-site who can initiate PrEP and PEP. Recommendations are offered to implement a community pharmacy PrEP program. Pharmacy, government, and HIV prevention leaders must be prepared to support and promote transformative changes, including (1) modification or expansion of existing state-specific scope of practice to initiate PrEP and PEP, (2) encouraging pharmacist education about PrEP and PEP, (3) identification and screening of candidates for PrEP eligibility, (4) incorporating pharmacy laboratory ordering and monitoring logistics, (5) adjusting workflow and ensuring confidential spaces for sensitive discussions, and (6) addressing reimbursement to maintain pharmacist-delivered PrEP and PEP programs. HIV disproportionately affects minority communities and younger individuals who may not be engaged in the health care system. Community pharmacies are accessible and can help increase PrEP use. Expansion of community pharmacy PrEP programs are needed to help end the HIV epidemic. Implementation of PrEP requires adaptation of the pharmacy profession to support incorporation of PrEP in a community pharmacy. Endorsement and support of community pharmacists are needed to implement PrEP to increase HIV prevention efforts and expand pharmacists’ scope of practice.     

An exploration of the utility of appraisals for the revalidation of pharmacy professionals in community pharmacy in Great Britain

BackgroundWith revalidation in pharmacy in the United Kingdom fast approaching, appropriate systems of revalidation in community pharmacy are required. With little known about the potential use of appraisals for evaluating fitness to practice in pharmacy professionals (pharmacists and pharmacy technicians) in this sector, research was undertaken to explore their potential utility in a revalidation process.ObjectivesTo examine existing structures and processes in community pharmacy appraisals in Great Britain (ie, England, Scotland, and Wales) and consider the views of pharmacy stakeholders on if, and how, appraisals could contribute to revalidation of pharmacy professionals.MethodsSemi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with senior staff (eg, superintendents and professional development managers) from chain community pharmacies as well as pharmacy managers/owners from independent pharmacies. Senior staff from locum agencies and pharmacy technician stakeholders were also interviewed.ResultsAppraisals were in place for pharmacists in most chain pharmacies but not in independent pharmacies. Locum pharmacists were not appraised, either by the companies they worked for or by the locum agencies. Pharmacy managers/owners working in independent pharmacies were also not appraised. Pharmacy technicians were appraised in most chain pharmacies but only in some independent pharmacies. Where appraisals were in operation, they were carried out by line managers who may or may not be a pharmacist. Appraisals did not seem to cover areas relevant to fitness to practice but instead focused more on performance related to business targets. This was particularly true for those in more senior positions within the organization such as area managers and superintendent pharmacists.ConclusionsExisting systems of appraisal, on their own, do not seem to be suitable for revalidating a pharmacy professional. Considerable changes to the existing appraisal systems in community pharmacy and employer engagement may be necessary if they are to play a role in revalidation.     

An observational survey assessing the extent of PrEP and PEP furnishing in San Francisco Bay Area pharmacies

BackgroundHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV) remains prevalent in the United States despite medications that reduce the risk of infection, primarily pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP). In 2019, California authorized pharmacists to furnish PrEP and PEP under Senate Bill 159 (SB-159).ObjectiveAssess implementation of SB159 in San Francisco Bay Area community and mail-order pharmacies.MethodsWe conducted an observational, cross-sectional survey of independent community and mail-order pharmacies in the 9-county San Francisco Bay Area to identify those that were in the process of furnishing, actively furnished, or furnished under a collaborative practice agreement (CPA). We conducted interviews with furnishing pharmacies in April 2021, focusing on the barriers to and successes of implementation, as well as the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and qualitatively analyzed them.ResultsOf the 209 pharmacies contacted, 6 furnished under SB-159 (2.9%), 2 were in the process of furnishing under SB-159, and 1 furnished under a CPA. Six pharmacies and 7 pharmacists were interviewed. Barriers to implementation and furnishing included COVID-19, laboratory tests, lack of time and staff, cost to pharmacy, refill limitation, lack of patient awareness, difficulty arranging follow-up care, and vague wording of the policy. Facilitators to implementation included collaborations with clinics and health centers, privacy, increased accessibility, increased need in the patient population, and the pharmacy culture.ConclusionBarriers and facilitators to PrEP and PEP furnishing were consistent across pharmacies, suggesting strategies that could be replicated and potential improvements to SB-159.     

Helping Unlock Better Care (HUB|C) using quality improvement science in community pharmacies – An implementation method

IntroductionCommunity pharmacists’ optimal scope of practice extends far beyond traditional dispensing or compounding, and health promotion or chronic disease management services based in the pharmacy can generate significant social and economic value. But, with many competing demands and performance expectations from patients, payers, and policymakers, many pharmacies face challenges when introducing, maintaining, optimizing, or integrating their service offerings. Quality Improvement (QI) science may provide a practical change management framework for pharmacy professionals to lead their teams in embracing optimal scope and in making pharmacy-based services more feasible and attractive for all parties.Project aimsTo build community pharmacies’ capacity for continuous QI (CQI) and to understand how the implementation of CQI is best achieved in this setting.MethodsCommunity pharmacies will undertake a process of change within one or more existing pharmacy services. Participatory action research principles will empower these sites to identify their own opportunities for improvement, generate change ideas, and trial and study those ideas in practice, using a QI system built on the Model for Improvement and Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. An external Quality Facilitator will consult and train an internal Change Champion and other pharmacy staff to use QI tools and strategy. Mixed methods will be used to explore changes in pharmacy service quality, and to understand the experience of the pharmacy professionals taking part in the QI process.Intended outcomesTo assess the capacity and willingness of community pharmacies to undertake self-directed QI initiatives, with the support of an external Quality Facilitator and an established QI approach. Understandings surrounding the transferability of this process, including further scale-up, and the production of additional change management tools are additional potential outcomes of this work.     

Community chain pharmacists’ perceptions of increased technicians’ involvement in the immunization process

BackgroundOver the past 2 decades, pharmacists have positioned immunization services as an important aspect of their expanding role in patient care.ObjectivesTo examine how community chain pharmacists view time spent on immunization, available in-store resources and barriers, and pharmacy technician involvement in the context of their views about the achievement of key National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) Standards of Adult Immunization Practice in their workplace.MethodsA representative, nationwide survey was administered electronically to chain community pharmacists over a 4-week period. Community pharmacists offering year-round immunization in retail chain, supermarket, and mass-merchant settings, randomly sampled from a database maintained by the American Pharmacists Association. We examined several sets of interrelated relationships regarding pharmacists’ perceived achievement of 3 key NVAC standards (assessment, recommendation and administration), time spent on the overall immunization process, the effectiveness of available in-store resources, immunization impediments, and the endorsement of increased technician involvement in community pharmacy-based immunization service (PBIS) delivery.ResultsA sample of 590 survey responses was obtained from 9717 e-mails delivered, with 489 deemed eligible (5% response rate). Sizeable numbers of pharmacists acknowledged that several activities integral to achieving optimal immunization levels were not being addressed. Although pharmacists accepted that appropriately trained pharmacy technicians should be able to ask (77%) and assess (66%) patients, only 24% agreed that technicians should be able to administer vaccine doses. Pharmacists satisfied with in-store immunization resources and technicians’ involvement were more likely to report achieving the 3 key NVAC standards. Paradoxically, how pharmacists viewed their immunization time expenditures was unrelated to whether they agreed that pharmacy technicians should have an expanded role in asking, assessing, or administering vaccines to their patients.ConclusionOverall, community pharmacies would likely better meet national immunization goals by achieving all 3 key NVAC standards and incorporating expanded roles for appropriately trained and supervised technicians in PBIS.