Display options
Share it on

Pharm Pract (Granada). 2020 Jan-Mar;18(1):1660. doi: 10.18549/PharmPract.2020.1.1660. Epub 2020 Mar 11.

Community pharmacists' recommendations for natural products for stress in Melbourne, Australia: a simulated patient study.

Pharmacy practice

Kevin Clayton, Yoni Luxford, Joshua Colaci, Meral Hasan, Rebecca Miltiadou, Daria Novikova, Dean Vlahopoulos, Ieva Stupans

Affiliations

  1. BPharm, B Health Sci (Naturopathy), Grad Dip Health.Sci (Herbal Medicine). School of Health, University of New England. Armidale, NSW (Australia). [email protected].
  2. PhD., Grad Dip PHC, GCTT, BSW, RN, RM. Senior Lecturer. School of Health, University of New England. Armidale, NSW (Australia). [email protected].
  3. RMIT University. Melbourne, VIC (Australia). [email protected].
  4. BSc, BPharm(Hons). RMIT University. Melbourne, VIC (Australia). [email protected].
  5. RMIT University. Melbourne, VIC (Australia). [email protected].
  6. RMIT University. Melbourne, VIC (Australia). [email protected].
  7. RMIT University. Melbourne, VIC (Australia). [email protected].
  8. PhD, BPharm (Hons). Professor of Pharmacy. School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University. Melbourne, VIC (Australia). [email protected].

PMID: 32256893 PMCID: PMC7092712 DOI: 10.18549/PharmPract.2020.1.1660

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Community pharmacists are often the first health professional approached to provide treatment for health issues, including the important mental health challenge, stress. Over-the-counter products for stress almost always are complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) and in Australia no protocol exists for their recommendation and sale in community pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality and relevance of community pharmacists' information gathering (questioning), counselling and product selection when interacting with customers requesting a CAM product for stress and consequently determine whether Australian pharmacy practice indicates the need for guidelines similar to those provided for 'pharmacy only' (S2) and 'pharmacist only' (S3) medicines.

METHODS: A covert simulated patient was used to investigate the response of pharmacists to a request for a natural product for stress. The SPs documented the details of the pharmacist-simulated patient interaction immediately on leaving the pharmacy and then re-entered the pharmacy to debrief the pharmacist. The quality of the interaction was scored as a Total CARE (check, assess, respond, explain) Score, based on anticipated questions and counselling advice. The appropriateness of the product was scored as a Product Efficacy Score, based on evidence-based literature.

RESULTS: Data from 100 pharmacies was provided. Information gathering illustrated by the questioning components Check and Assess (C and A) of the total CARE score by pharmacists was poor. The number of questions asked ranged from zero (13 pharmacists) to 7 (four pharmacists), the average being 3.1 (SD 1.9). Provision of advice was generally better (a description of the suggested product was offered by 87 pharmacists) but was lacking in other areas (duration of use and side effects were explained by only 41 and 16 pharmacists respectively). The most common product suggested was B-group vitamins (57 pharmacists) followed by a proprietary flower essence product (19 pharmacists). A two-step cluster analysis revealed two sub-groups of pharmacists: one cluster (74 pharmacists) with a high Total CARE score provided an appropriate product. The other cluster (20 pharmacists) had a low total CARE score and provided an inappropriate product.

CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacy visits revealed major shortcomings in questioning, counselling and product recommendation. There is a need to develop guidelines for pharmacists to make evidence-based decisions in recommending complementary and alternative medicine.

Copyright: © Pharmacy Practice.

Keywords: Australia; Cluster Analysis; Complementary Therapies; Counseling; Mental Health; Nonprescription Drugs; Patient Simulation; Pharmacies; Pharmacists

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST None declared.

References

  1. Psychophysiology. 2016 Mar;53(3):336-47 - PubMed
  2. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Apr;104(4):716-33 - PubMed
  3. Int J Pharm Pract. 2020 Feb;28(1):13-25 - PubMed
  4. Swiss Med Wkly. 2010 Aug 24;140:w13079 - PubMed
  5. Health Psychol. 1990;9(6):653-75 - PubMed
  6. Psychophysiology. 2016 Mar;53(3):312-22 - PubMed
  7. Chronic Stress (Thousand Oaks). 2017 Jun 8;1: - PubMed
  8. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2015 Aug;54(8):617-25 - PubMed
  9. S Afr Med J. 2000 Dec;90(12):1216-23 - PubMed
  10. Curr Opin Psychol. 2015 Aug;4:6-12 - PubMed
  11. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2006 Dec;32(6):431-42 - PubMed
  12. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2011 Oct;26(7):470-6 - PubMed
  13. J Altern Complement Med. 2007 Jul-Aug;13(6):643-50 - PubMed
  14. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1:293-319 - PubMed
  15. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2000 Jun;150(2):220-5 - PubMed
  16. J Psychopharmacol. 2015 Dec;29(12):1236-47 - PubMed
  17. Stress. 2017 Jan;20(1):95-111 - PubMed

Publication Types