Pharmacists subject to complaints: a national study of pharmacists reported to health regulators in Australia

Understanding Risk Factors for Complaints Against Pharmacists: A Content Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Pharmacists constitute a crucial component of the healthcare system, significantly influencing the provision of medication services and ensuring patient safety. This study aims to understand the characteristics and risk factors for complaints against pharmacists through Health and Disability Commissioner (HDC) published decisions.

METHODS

This study adopts a retrospective, qualitative approach. An inductive content analysis technique was used to analyze 37 complaints against pharmacists published decisions from the New Zealand Health and Disability Commissioner website to investigate a range of underlying risk factors contributing to the occurrence of complaints against pharmacists.

RESULTS

A set of 20 categories of risk factors emerged through the content analysis and were subsequently grouped into five overarching themes: pharmacist individual factors, organizational factors, system factors, medication-specific factors, and external environmental factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study provide valuable insights that expand the understanding of risk management in pharmacist practice, serving as a valuable resource for regulatory bodies, policymakers, educators, and practitioners. It is recommended not only to focus solely on individual pharmacists but also to consider integrating their environment and individual behaviors to proactively address situations prone to errors and subsequent complaints.

Bridging the gap between healthcare professions' regulation and practice: the "lived experience" of community pharmacists in Ireland following regulatory change

BACKGROUND

Reforms to models of health and care regulation internationally have adapted to address the challenges associated with regulating healthcare professionals. Pharmacists in Ireland entered a new era of regulation with the enactment of the Pharmacy Act in 2007 which significantly updated the law regulating pharmacy in Ireland and expanded the regulatory scope considerably. An earlier study in 2017 examined the experiences of 20 community pharmacists of the Act. This follow-up study aimed to expand the scope of the original study to all community pharmacists in Ireland, to report their "lived experience" of the regulatory model introduced by the Act, assessing its impact on their professional practice using the principles of "better regulation".

METHODS

Survey methodology was used to assess the perception of all community pharmacists registered with the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland of the Act, as implemented, on their practice using an experimental design based on the seven principles of "Better Regulation". Descriptive statistics analyzed quantitative responses while answers from open-ended questions were analyzed using a combination of a modified framework analysis and a qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Respondents agreed that the Act was necessary, although its implementation by the regulator was largely not viewed as fulfilling the remaining "Better Regulation" principles of being effective, proportional, consistent, agile, accountable and transparent. In particular, its proportionality was questioned. This resulted in pharmacists perceiving that their professional competency to act in the best interests of their patients was not appropriately acknowledged by the regulator, which in turn compromised their ability to provide optimal care for their patients.

CONCLUSION

While healthcare professional regulation must primarily be concerned with public protection, it must also have regard to its impact on those delivering healthcare services. The findings highlight the challenge internationally of balancing rigidity and flexibility in professional health and care regulation, and the importance of a regulatory conversation occurring between those regulating and those regulated. This would serve to promote mutual learning and understanding to create a responsive approach to regulation, underpinned by mutual trust, effective risk assessment and adherence to the principles of "Better Regulation".