Learning to prescribe - pharmacists' experiences of supplementary prescribing training in England.
BACKGROUND
The introduction of non-medical prescribing for professions such as pharmacy and nursing in recent years offers additional responsibilities and opportunities but attendant training issues. In the UK and in contrast to some international models, becoming a non-medical prescriber involves the completion of an accredited training course offered by many higher education institutions, where the skills and knowledge necessary for prescribing are learnt.


OBJECTIVE
to explore pharmacists' perceptions and experiences of learning to prescribe on supplementary prescribing (SP) courses, particularly in relation to inter-professional learning, course content and subsequent use of prescribing in practice.


METHODS
A postal questionnaire survey was sent to all 808 SP registered pharmacists in England in April 2007, exploring demographic, training, prescribing, safety culture and general perceptions of SP.


RESULTS
After one follow-up, 411 (51%) of pharmacists responded. 82% agreed SP training was useful, 58% agreed courses provided appropriate knowledge and 62% agreed that the necessary prescribing skills were gained. Clinical examination, consultation skills training and practical experience with doctors were valued highly; pharmacology training and some aspects of course delivery were criticised. Mixed views on inter-professional learning were reported - insights into other professions being valued but knowledge and skills differences considered problematic. 67% believed SP and recent independent prescribing (IP) should be taught together, with more diagnostic training wanted; few pharmacists trained in IP, but many were training or intending to train. There was no association between pharmacists' attitudes towards prescribing training and when they undertook training between 2004 and 2007 but earlier cohorts were more likely to be using supplementary prescribing in practice.


CONCLUSIONS
Pharmacists appeared to value their SP training and suggested improvements that could inform future courses. The benefits of inter-professional learning, however, may conflict with providing profession-specific training. SP training may be perceived to be an instrumental 'stepping stone' in pharmacists' professional project of gaining full IP status.
Cooper
Richard J
RJ
Division of Social Research in Medicines and Health, School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, UK. richard.cooper@nottingham.ac.uk
Lymn
Joanne
J
Anderson
Claire
C
Avery
Anthony
A
Bissell
Paul
P
Guillaume
Louise
L
Hutchinson
Allen
A
Murphy
Elizabeth
E
Ratcliffe
Julie
J
Ward
Paul
P
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D003933:Diagnosis; D004506:Education, Nursing; D004512:Education, Pharmacy / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards*; D004739:England; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D033182:Intention; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D008297:Male; D010600:Pharmacology / Q000193:education*; D010808:Physical Examination; D055656:Prescriptions / Q000592:standards*; D017009:Professional Autonomy; D011361:Professional Competence; D015397:Program Evaluation; D012017:Referral and Consultation; D012449:Safety; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires