| Title |
PACE: Pharmacists use the power of communication in paediatric asthma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-014-9984-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda Elaro, Smita Shah, Luca N. Pomare, Carol L. Armour, Sinthia Z. Bosnic-Anticevich |
| Abstract |
Background Paediatric asthma is a public health burden in Australia despite the availability of national asthma guidelines. Community pharmacy interventions focusing on paediatric asthma are scarce. Practitioner Asthma Communication and Education (PACE) is an evidence-based program, developed in the USA for general practice physicians, aimed at addressing the issues of poor clinician-patient communication in the management of paediatric asthma. This program has been shown to improve paediatric asthma management practices of general practitioners in the USA and Australia. The development of a PACE program for community pharmacists will fill a void in the current armamentarium for pharmacist-patient care. Objectives To adapt the educational program, PACE, to the community pharmacy setting. To test the feasibility of the new program for pharmacy and to explore its potential impact on pharmacists' communication skills and asthma related practices. Setting Community pharmacies located within the Sydney metropolitan. Method The PACE framework was reviewed by the research team and amended in order to ensure its relevance within the pharmacy context, thereby developing PACE for Pharmacy. Forty-four pharmacists were recruited and trained in small groups in the PACE for Pharmacy workshops. Pharmacists' satisfaction and acceptability of the workshops, confidence in using communication strategies pre- and post-workshop and self-reported behaviour change post workshop were evaluated. Main Outcome Measure Pharmacist self-reported changes in communication and teaching behaviours during a paediatric asthma consultation. Results All 44 pharmacists attended both workshops, completed pre- and post-workshop questionnaires and provided feedback on the workshops (100 % retention). The participants reported a high level of satisfaction and valued the interactive nature of the workshops. Following the PACE for Pharmacy program, pharmacists reported significantly higher levels in using the communication strategies, confidence in their application and their helpfulness. Pharmacists checked for written asthma self-management plan possession and inhaler device technique more regularly, and provided verbal instructions more frequently to paediatric asthma patients/carers at the initiation of a new medication. Conclusion This study provides preliminary evidence that the PACE program can be translated into community pharmacy. PACE for Pharmacy positively affected self-reported communication and education behaviours of pharmacists. The high response rate shows that pharmacists are eager to expand on their clinical role in primary healthcare. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 93 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 16% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 25% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 16 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 13% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 24 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,783,222
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#739
of 1,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,411
of 229,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#18
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,079 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 229,815 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.