No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
ASSOCIATION FOR PRESCRIBERS SPECIAL
Abstract
Aim
Only 2.7% of UK registered physiotherapists are qualified to prescribe. This pilot study explored attitudes to medicine use, barriers to prescribing in practice for physiotherapists and training needs.
Methods
An online questionnaire was distributed via professional networks. Descriptive statistics were used to quantify data with t-tests and Mann-Whitney-U tests were used to explore correlations in data. Qualitative (free text) data were analysed for common themes using thematic analysis.
Findings
A total of 51 physiotherapists (37% n= 19) prescribers completed the questionnaire. Attitudes towards medicines were similar. Respondents understood the benefits of prescribing but identified personal, professional and organisational barriers. Lack of pharmacology knowledge was reported by 56.7% (n=25) and identified as a training need among physiotherapists who had qualified in the UK (n=44), 40% (n= 20) of respondents identified a lack of support for physiotherapist prescribing in the workplace.
Conclusions
Exploring physiotherapists' attitudes towards medicines and barriers to implementation of prescribing offers the potential for supportive interventions and future research.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Background
Increasing numbers of nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals across the world have prescribing rights for medicines: over 90,000 of the eligible United Kingdom workforce are qualified as non-doctor prescribers. In order to inform future developments, it is important to understand the benefits and impact of prescribing by allied health professionals including physiotherapists and podiatrists.
Aim
to compare outcomes of physiotherapist and podiatrist Independent Prescriber (PP- IP) patients with those of physiotherapist and podiatrist non-prescribers (PP-NPs). Outcome measures included patient satisfaction, ease of access to services, quality of life and cost implications.
Design: a mixed method comparative case study.
Methods
Using mixed methods of data collection, outcomes were compared between 7 sites where care was provided from a PP-IP (3 podiatrist and 4 physiotherapist IPs) and 7 sites from a PP-NP (3 podiatrist and 4 physiotherapist NPs). Patients were followed up for 2 months (2015–2016).
Results
489 patients were recruited: n = 243 IP sites, and n = 246 NP sites. Independent prescribing was found to be highly acceptable, and equivalent in terms of quality of life ( p > 0.05) and patient satisfaction ( p ≤ 0.05) compared to care provided by NPs. PP-IP care delivery was found to be more resource intensive than PP-NP, with longer consultation duration for IPs (around 6.5 mins), and a higher proportion of physiotherapy patients discussed with medical colleagues (around 9.5 min).
Conclusion
This study provides new knowledge that PP-IPs provide high levels of care. PP-IP care delivery was found to be more resource intensive. Further research is required to explore cost effectiveness. A more focussed exploration within each profession using targeted outcome measures would enable a more robust comparison, inform future developments around the world and help ensure non-doctor prescribing is recognised as an effective way to alleviate shortfalls in the global workforce.
Objectives
To explore: (1) the views of Australian physiotherapists regarding potential implementation of non-medical prescribing in Australia, (2) how the geographical location and health sector in which a clinician works may influence their perceptions and (3) the perceptions of Australian physiotherapists about how physiotherapist prescribing might impact the care that the profession can provide.
Design
A cross-sectional descriptive survey using open and closed questions.
Setting
Participants completed an online questionnaire.
Participants
883 Australian Health Professionals Registration Authority (AHPRA)-registered physiotherapists, working across all states and territories.
Outcome measures
An online questionnaire was developed by a panel of subject experts and pretested (n=10) for internal consistency. A hyperlink to the questionnaire was emailed to all members of the Australian Physiotherapy Association. A reminder email was sent 4 weeks later. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, with use of absolute risk reductions (ARRs) and 95% CIs to determine the likelihood that health sector or geographical location were associated with specific views. Thematic analysis enabled synthesis of the qualitative data.
Results
79.0% participants felt that physiotherapist prescribing should be introduced in Australia, with 71.2% wanting to train as prescribers. Clinical governance, risk management, regulation of clinicians and the development of an education framework were identified as priorities for implementation. Participants working in the private sector were significantly more likely to train as prescribers than those in the public sector (ARR 9.9%; 95% CI 3.5 to 16.4) or educational/research institutions (ARR 23.3%; 95% CI 12.8 to 33.8), with city dwellers significantly more likely to train compared with physiotherapists in remote regions (ARR 19.8%; 95% CI 0.8 to 39.2). Physiotherapist prescribing was predicted to improve efficiency of healthcare delivery, access to medicines and reductions in healthcare costs.
Conclusions
AHPRA-registered physiotherapists perceive that the introduction of autonomous physiotherapist prescribing would be beneficial for the Australian population and should be introduced. Decision makers should consider the results of this survey in conjunction with cost–benefit and risk analysis when planning the introduction of physiotherapist prescribing.
Objective
To provide national consensus and establish priorities with regards to the factors that promote the implementation and continued development of non-medical prescribing within health services.
Design
Classic e-Delphi survey.
Setting
National study in Wales.
Participants
Pharmacists, nurses and allied health professionals with the independent/supplementary prescribing qualification.
Results
A total of 55 non-medical prescribers agreed to become members of the expert panel of whom 42 (76%) completed the round 1 questionnaire, 40/42 (95%) completed round 2 and 34/40 (85%) responded to round 3. Twenty-one statements were developed, and consensus was achieved on nine factors representing those necessary for the successful implementation of non-medical prescribing and five representing actions required for its continued development. Strategic fit between non-medical prescribing and existing service provision, organisation preparedness, visible benefits, good managerial and team support, and a clear differentiation of roles were each important influences.
Conclusion
Given the high degree of consensus, this list of factors and actions should provide guidance to managers and commissioners of services wishing to initiate or extend non-medical prescribing. This information should be considered internationally by other countries outside of the UK wishing to implement prescribing by non-medical healthcare professionals.
Introduction
Non-medical prescribing has the potential to deliver innovative healthcare within limited finances. However, uptake has been slow, and a proportion of non-medical prescribers do not use the qualification. This systematic review aimed to describe the facilitators and barriers to non-medical prescribing in the United Kingdom.
Methods
The systematic review and thematic analysis included qualitative and mixed methods papers reporting facilitators and barriers to independent non-medical prescribing in the United Kingdom. The following databases were searched to identify relevant papers: AMED, ASSIA, BNI, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, Open Grey, Open access theses and dissertations, and Web of Science. Papers published between 2006 and March 2017 were included. Studies were quality assessed using a validated tool (QATSDD), then underwent thematic analysis. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42015019786).
Results
Of 3991 potentially relevant identified studies, 42 were eligible for inclusion. The studies were generally of moderate quality (83%), and most (71%) were published 2007–2012. The nursing profession dominated the studies (30/42). Thematic analysis identified three overarching themes: non-medical prescriber, human factors, and organisational aspects. Each theme consisted of several sub-themes; the four most highly mentioned were ‘medical professionals’, ‘area of competence’, ‘impact on time’ and ‘service’. Sub-themes were frequently interdependent on each other, having the potential to act as a barrier or facilitator depending on circumstances.
Discussion
Addressing the identified themes and subthemes enables strategies to be developed to support and optimise non-medical prescribing. Further research is required to identify if similar themes are encountered by other non-medical prescribing groups than nurses and pharmacists.
Question:
What are the factors that affect the implementation or utilisation of independent non-medical prescribing (iNMP)?
Design:
Mixed-methods systematic review. Two reviewers independently completed searches, eligibility and quality assessments.
Data sources:
Pre-defined search terms were utilised to search electronic databases. Reference lists, key journals and grey literature were searched alongside consultation with authors/experts.
Eligibility criteria for included studies:
Qualitative and quantitative studies investigating independent prescribing by any non-medical professional group. Study participants included any stakeholders involved in actual or proposed iNMP. Measurements reported on data describing stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of the barriers to/facilitators of iNMP.
Results:
A total of 43 qualitative and seven quantitative studies from three countries (n=12, 117 participants) were included. Quality scores varied from 9 to 35 (Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs, 0 to 48). Qualitative data were synthesised into four themes (and subthemes): systems (government and political, organisational, formulary); education and support (non-medical prescribing (NMP) courses/continuous professional development (CPD)); personal and professional (medical profession, NMP professions, service users); and financial factors. Quantitative data corroborated the qualitative themes. Integration of the qualitative themes and quantitative data enabled the development of a NMP implementation framework.
Conclusion:
Barriers to and facilitators of the implementation and utilisation of iNMP are evident, demonstrating multifactorial and context-specific variables within four explicit themes. Professional bodies, politicians, policy and healthcare managers and clinicians could use the resulting NMP implementation framework to ensure the safe and successful implementation and utilisation of NMP. Clinical physiotherapists and other clinicians should consider whether these variables have been adequately addressed prior to adopting NMP into their clinical practice.
Registration:
PROSPERO CRD42015017212. [Noblet T, Marriott J, Graham-Clarke E, Rushton A (2017) Barriers to and facilitators of independent non-medical prescribing in clinical practice: a mixed-methods systematic review. Journal of Physiotherapy XX: XX-XX].
Nonmedical prescribing has been allowed in the United Kingdom (UK) since 1992. Its development over the past 24 years has been marked by changes in legislation, enabling the progression towards independent prescribing for nurses, pharmacists and a range of allied health professionals. Although the UK has led the way regarding the introduction of nonmedical prescribing, it is now seen in a number of other Western-European and Anglophone countries although the models of application vary widely between countries. The programme of study to become a nonmedical prescriber (NMP) within the UK is rigorous, and involves a combination of taught curricula and practice-based learning. Prescribing is a complex skill that is high risk and error prone, with many influencing factors. Literature reports regarding the impact of nonmedical prescribing are sparse, with the majority of prescribing research tending to focus instead on prescribing by doctors. The impact of nonmedical prescribing however is important to evaluate, and can be carried out from several perspectives. This review takes a brief look back at the history of nonmedical prescribing, and compares this with the international situation. It also describes the processes required to qualify as a NMP in the UK, potential influences on nonmedical prescribing and the impact of nonmedical prescribing on patient opinions and outcomes and the opinions of doctors and other healthcare professionals.
Aims:
To assess the medication knowledge of emergency department nurses and determine the factors affecting their nurse-initiated medication practices.
Background:
Nurse-initiated medications is a vital practice for all nurses in emergency departments which improves pain assessment, provides safe pain management and reduces time-to-analgesia and other meaningful treatments.
Design:
Mixed methods. Between September 2014-January 2015, data were collected by questionnaire assessing medication knowledge and face-to-face interviews determining factors affecting practice.
Results:
Nurse-initiated medications frequency of the Registered Nurses ranged from 0-36 times per week dependent on employed hours and emergency department area worked. Medication knowledge was consistent among nurses, but there was an overall deficit in nurses' knowledge of mechanism of action. Four major themes were identified from the 24 interviews: patient-centred care, caution and safety as principles of practice; continuing support and education; improvement of practice over time. All nurses regard the practice positively and to be extremely beneficial to patients. Although apprehensive at the start of their nurse-initiated medications practice, confidence improved with exposure and experience. Nurses sought additional information from colleagues and the available evidence-based resources.
Conclusion:
Medication knowledge is not the sole determinant of nurse-initiated medications practice. The practice is motivated by multiple factors such as patients' needs, safety and nurses' confidence.
Background
The right to prescribe drugs remains a contentious issue within the chiropractic profession. Nevertheless, drug prescription by manual therapy providers is currently an important topic. Notably, physiotherapists in the United Kingdom were recently granted limited independent prescribing rights. Reports suggest that physiotherapists in Australia now want those same rights, and as such a review of chiropractors' general attitudes toward drug prescription is needed.
Objective
To examine the literature concerning chiropractors' attitudes toward drug prescription rights and to compare the opinions of chiropractors currently licensed to prescribe medication with those in the profession who are not.
Methods
This was a narrative review, consisting of a formal literature search and summary of included articles. Electronic databases searched included the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature. Inclusion criteria consisted of prospective studies published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Studies were required to contain data on chiropractors' opinions toward medication prescription rights.
Results
Of 33 articles identified, a total of seven surveys were included in the review. Of these, there was a general split in opinion among chiropractors regarding the right to prescribe drugs in chiropractic practice. Those supportive of prescribing rights favoured a limited number of over-the-counter and/or prescription-based medications such as analgesics, anti-inflammatories, and muscle relaxants. When questioned on full prescribing rights, however, chiropractors were generally opposed. In jurisdictions where chiropractors are currently licensed to prescribe from a limited formulary, such as in Switzerland, the majority perceived this right as an advantage for the profession. Moreover, continuing education in pharmacology was viewed as a necessary component of this privilege.
Conclusions
Based on the literature to date there is a general split in chiropractors' attitudes toward drug prescription rights. This split is most pronounced in countries where chiropractors are not licensed to prescribe medications. Notwithstanding, this is an important topic in chiropractic currently and warrants both further discussion and research to determine future directions and the implications of either pursuit or denial of prescription rights by chiropractors. Future surveys and/or qualitative studies of other chiropractors' opinions toward gaining prescription privileges would be timely.
Physiotherapists should be proactive in preparing themselves to participate in innovative models of health care, which are emerging from the healthcare workforce reforms in Australia. One challenging outcome of workforce change is physiotherapy (non-medical) prescribing (NMP), which is part of the extension of scope of physiotherapy practice. This paper summarises the current evidence base for Australian physiotherapists seeking to obtain prescribing rights. A targeted literature review was undertaken through EBSCO Host, Cochrane, Medline, SportsDiscus, Cinahl, Healthsource and Google.com using broad search terms to identify peer-reviewed and grey literature pertaining to NMP by physiotherapists, nationally and internationally. No critical appraisal was undertaken however literature was structured into the NHMRC hierarchy of evidence. Themes raised in the included literature were reported descriptively. There were six relevant peer-reviewed articles, of hierarchy levels III_3 and IV. There was however, comprehensive and recent grey literature to inform Australian physiotherapy NMP initiatives. Themes included the need for standard National action in relation to legislative and regulatory/registration issues, appropriate education, credentialing and supervisory requirements for physiotherapy prescribing. Many lessons can be learnt from the literature, including the importance of planned, uniform National action (rather than piecemeal state-by-state initiatives). Essential elements include appropriate training and skills-based recognition within the discipline and the broader health team, and the need to overtly demonstrate effectiveness and safety. Regularly-evaluated service-delivery models which support NMP by physiotherapists are further required, to demonstrate efficiency, timeliness, patient centredness and equity.
Thematic analysis is a poorly demarcated, rarely acknowledged, yet widely used qualitative analytic method within psychology. In this paper, we argue that it offers an accessible and theoretically flexible approach to analysing qualitative data. We outline what thematic analysis is, locating it in relation to other qualitative analytic methods that search for themes or patterns, and in relation to different epistemological and ontological positions. We then provide clear guidelines to those wanting to start thematic analysis, or conduct it in a more deliberate and rigorous way, and consider potential pitfalls in conducting thematic analysis. Finally, we outline the disadvantages and advantages of thematic analysis. We conclude by advocating thematic analysis as a useful and flexible method for qualitative research in and beyond psychology.
Objective: Making best use of existing skills to increase service capacity is a global challenge. The aim was to systematically review physiotherapy and podiatrist prescribing and medicines management activity, including evidence of impact on patient care, levels of knowledge and attitudes towards extended medicines role. Methods: A search of MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases, using terms to identify prescribing and medicines management across a range of roles, was conducted from January 1985 to May 2016 for physiotherapy, and January 1968 to May 2016 for podiatry. Hand searching of citations and databases from professional organisations was undertaken. Data were extracted and analysed descriptively, and quality appraised by 2 reviewers using the mixed methods appraisal tool. Results:1316 papers were identified, and 21 included in the review. No studies were identified that reported prescribing and no studies specific to podiatry met the inclusion criteria. Physiotherapists were highly involved in administering medicines, providing medicines advice, and recommending new medicines. Patient satisfaction, cost and outcomes were equivalent when comparing physiotherapist-led injection therapy to traditional care. Pharmacology knowledge was variable and unmet training needs identified. Conclusion:Medicines management practices were identified in physiotherapy and positive outcomes of extended scope physiotherapy. There was a lack of evidence regarding podiatric practice. Review of educational preparation for medicines management is recommended along with evaluation of medicines management practice.
SummaryThe scope of physiotherapy practice was extended in 1995 to include intra-articular and intra-lesional injections within musculoskeletal therapy, provided that physiotherapists had undertaken ‘appropriate training’.The purpose of this study was to investigate the experience of physiotherapists in applying their injection therapy skills following training. A qualitative study was used, based on a phenomenological approach, to be able to explore the actual experience of physiotherapists. Participants volunteered to take part in the study and unstructured interviews were conducted, transcribed and analysed.The investigation was performed as a step towards identifying facilitating factors and barriers to practice as experienced by physiotherapists in implementing their injection therapy skills. Four principal themes arose from the interviews relating to professional autonomy, professional relationships, affective factors and training issues. Extension of the investigation will aim to explore this investigation's findings further, to contribute to the theory underpinning the development of injection training programmes and to inform the profession as a whole.
Skin disease can have a huge impact on quality of life for patients and their families. Nurses have an important role in the delivery of specialist dermatology services, and prescribing enhances the care they provide. The views of dermatology patients about nurse prescribing are unknown.
To explore the views of dermatology patients about nurse prescribing, and its impact on medicines management and concordance.
Semistructured interviews were undertaken with a consecutive sample of 42 patients with acne, psoriasis or eczema who attended the clinics of seven dermatology specialist nurse prescribers. Primary and secondary care clinics were included to reflect settings in which nurses typically prescribe for patients within specialist dermatology services in England. Interviews addressed the effects of nurse prescribing on care, the patient's medicine regimen, involvement in treatment decisions and concordance, and influences on medicine taking.
Patients believed that nurse prescribing improved access to, and efficiency of, dermatology services. Great value was placed on telephone contact with nurses, and local access. Information exchange and involvement in treatment decisions ensured that treatment plans were appropriate and motivated adherence. Nurses' specialist knowledge, interactive and caring consultation style, and continuity of care improved confidence in the nurse and treatment concordance.
Nurse prescribing can increase the efficiency of dermatology services. Patients experienced active involvement in decisions about their treatment which in turn contributed to concordance and adherence to treatment regimens. This study has important implications for maximizing resource use and improving access to and quality of care in dermatology specialist services.
A self-administered, 61-item questionnaire, which inquired about the administration of prescription medications by physiotherapists, was mailed to a random sample of 25 per cent of clinical physiotherapists registered in NSW (n = 660). About one quarter of respondents, who were more likely to be private practitioners, administered prescription medications to their clients, 40 per cent of which occurred on a daily or weekly basis. The majority had approval from a physician and administration of prescription medications were given as an integral part of the treatment regime. More than 50 per cent of those physiotherapists who did administer prescription medications had no formal training in this practice except the little they had received in their undergraduate course.
This paper reports on a survey regarding physiotherapists' knowledge, use and attitudes to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), some of which have recently been re-scheduled to non-prescription dispensing. A written survey instrument was developed and administered to 750 physiotherapists in South Australia, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory (50% of the registered physiotherapists). Responses were received from 285 physiotherapists. The survey identified opportunities for patient misuse and misadventures with NSAIDs in conjunction with physiotherapy management. Differences in physiotherapist understanding of the dosage and actions of oral and topic administrations of NSAIDs were highlighted, as were the moral and ethical responsibilities of physiotherapists to patients considering taking NSAIDs. The study identified the need for regular professional updates on quality use of NSAIDs.
Evaluation of Physiotherapist and Podiatrist Independent Prescribing, Mixing of Medicines and Prescribing of Controlled Drugs
- N Carey
- K Stenner
- J Edwards
Carey N, Stenner K, Edwards J et al. Evaluation of Physiotherapist
and Podiatrist Independent Prescribing, Mixing of Medicines
and Prescribing of Controlled Drugs. 2017. https://www.
surrey.ac.uk/sites/default/fi les/eppip-executive-summary.pdf
(accessed 25 November 2020)
London: Department of Health
- Department
- Health
Department of Health.Report of the advisory group on
nurse prescribing (Crown Report). London: Department of
Health; 1989
The Medicines Act 1968 and the Human Medicines Regulations (Amendment) Order. London: Department of Health
- Department
- Health
Department of Health. The Medicines Act 1968 and the Human
Medicines Regulations (Amendment) Order. London:
Department of Health; 2013
Create better surveys and get answers
- Llc Qualtrics
Qualtrics LLC. Create better surveys and get answers. 2017.
https://www.qualtrics.com/survey-software/ (accessed 26
November 2020)