IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v85y2008i3p277-292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK--A thematic review of the literature

Author

Listed:
  • Cooper, Richard Jason
  • Anderson, Claire
  • Avery, Tony
  • Bissell, Paul
  • Guillaume, Louise
  • Hutchinson, Allen
  • James, Veronica
  • Lymn, Joanne
  • McIntosh, Aileen
  • Murphy, Elizabeth
  • Ratcliffe, Julie
  • Read, Sue
  • Ward, Paul

Abstract

Objectives Supplementary prescribing (SP) represents a recent development in non-medical prescribing in the UK, involving a tripartite agreement between independent medical prescriber, dependent prescriber and patient, enabling the dependent prescriber to prescribe in accordance with a patient-specific clinical management plan (CMP). The aim in this paper is to review, thematically, the literature on nurse and pharmacist SP, to inform further research, policy and education.Methods A review of the nursing and pharmacy SP literature from 1997 to 2007 was undertaken using searches of electronic databases, grey literature and journal hand searches.Results Nurses and pharmacists were positive about SP but the medical profession were more critical and lacked awareness/understanding, according to the identified literature. SP was identified in many clinical settings but implementation barriers emerged from the empirical and anecdotal literature, including funding problems, delays in practicing and obtaining prescription pads, encumbering clinical management plans and access to records. Empirical studies were often methodological weaknesses and under-evaluation of safety, economic analysis and patients' experiences were identified in empirical studies. There was a perception that nurse and pharmacist independent prescribing may supersede supplementary prescribing.Conclusions There is a need for additional research regarding SP and despite nurses' and pharmacists' enthusiasm, implementation issues, medical apathy and independent prescribing potentially undermine the success of SP.

Suggested Citation

  • Cooper, Richard Jason & Anderson, Claire & Avery, Tony & Bissell, Paul & Guillaume, Louise & Hutchinson, Allen & James, Veronica & Lymn, Joanne & McIntosh, Aileen & Murphy, Elizabeth & Ratcliffe, Juli, 2008. "Nurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK--A thematic review of the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 277-292, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:85:y:2008:i:3:p:277-292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(07)00178-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dianne Berry & Molly Courtenay & Elisabetta Bersellini, 2006. "Attitudes towards, and information needs in relation to, supplementary nurse prescribing in the UK: an empirical study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 22-28, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2018. "Hospital Pharmacists in Europe: Between Warehouse and Prescription Pad?," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 221-224, September.
    2. Bernsten, Cecilia & Andersson, Karolina & Gariepy, Yves & Simoens, Steven, 2010. "A comparative analysis of remuneration models for pharmaceutical professional services," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 1-9, April.
    3. Weiss, Marjorie Cecilia, 2011. "Diagnostic decision making: The last refuge for general practitioners?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(3), pages 375-382, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:85:y:2008:i:3:p:277-292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.