Community pharmacists should provide qualified drug information services for the rational use of medicine in community. However, there is no standard professional incentive for the service in Indonesia. This study aimed to assess drug information services with incentives and its associated factors among community pharmacists in Indonesia.

A multi-centre cross-sectional study was conducted among community pharmacists in Medan City, Bandung City, Bandung Regency, and Makassar City. A validated online self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data on pharmacists’ demographics, pharmacy characteristics, and drug information provision practices. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to identify factors associated with incentivized drug information services.

A total of 639 community pharmacists participated, with representation from Medan (21.9%), Bandung City (20.8%), Bandung Regency (26%), and Makassar (31.3%). Most respondents were female (79%) with a median age of 31 years (IQR: 9). Only 12% of pharmacists reported receiving incentives for providing drug information services. Factors significantly associated with receiving incentives included being male (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.16–3.58), aged 20–30 years (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.10–9.58), working over 40 hours per week (OR: 2.30, 95% CI: 1.16–4.58), working in a chain pharmacy (OR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.18–3.67), and having an onsite physician practice (OR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.04–2.85).

Limited number of community pharmacists received an incentive for drug information services. The development of a remuneration system for drug information services can be considered to enhance the quality of pharmaceutical care services in the community setting.

We aimed to explore participant perspectives on social prescribing (SP) for mental health and well-being and the acceptability of community pharmacists (CP) as members of SP pathways that support people with mild to moderate depression and anxiety.

SP aims to support people with poor health related to socio-demographic determinants. Positive effects of SP on self-belief, mood, well-being, and health are well documented, including a return to work for long-term unemployed.

The study was set in a city in southwest England with diverse cultural and socio-demographics. We recruited SP stakeholders, including CP, to either one of 17 interviews or a focus group with nine members of the public.

An inductive iterative approach to thematic analysis produced four superordinate themes: (1) offering choice a non-pharmacological option, (2) supporting pharmacy communities – ‘it is an extension of what we do’, (3) stakeholder perspectives – pharmacists are very busy and their expertise unknown by some, and (4) potential for pharmacy in primary care.

Stakeholders viewed CP as local to and accessible by their community. Pharmacists perceived referral to SP services as part of their current role. General practitioner participants considered pharmacy involvement could reduce their workload and expand the primary healthcare team. Importantly, general practitioners and CP viewed SP as a non-pharmacological alternative to prescribing unnecessary antidepressants and reduce associated adverse effects. All participants voiced concerns about pharmacy dispensing busyness as a potential barrier to involvement and pharmacists requesting mental health training updates.

Key findings suggest CP offer a potential alternative to the general practitioner for people with mild to moderate depression and anxiety seeking access to support and health information. However, CP need appropriately commissioned and funded involvement in SP, including backfill for ongoing dispensing, medicines optimization, and mental health first aid training.

The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a global pandemic with no therapy, and pharmacists being a part of the health care system have a vital role in the management of COVID-19. The purpose of this study is to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practices of community pharmacists (CPs) regarding COVID-19.

An online survey was conducted among 393 CPs in 2 provinces of Pakistan during the lockdown period. A validated questionnaire (Cronbach’s alpha, 0.745) was used for data collection. All statistical analyses were analyzed by using SPSS, version 21 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY).

Among 393 participants, 71.5% (n = 281) had good knowledge, 44% (n = 175) had a positive attitude, and 57.3% (n = 225) had good practices regarding COVID-19. Social media (45.29%, n = 178) were reported as the main source to seek information of COVID-19. Good knowledge, age ≥ 26 years, and a PhD degree level were the substantial determinants (P = < 0.05) of a good attitude. Similarly, a CP with experience of > 5 years, a PhD degree, good knowledge, and a good attitude has higher odds of having good practices as compared with reference categories (P = < 0.05).

In short, a majority of the CPs had good knowledge but had a poor attitude and practice toward the management of COVID-19. Standard-structured educational and counseling programs for CPs regarding COVID-19 are needed for effective management.

Rising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in primary care is a growing concern and a threat to community health. The rise of AMR can be slowed down if general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs) could work as a team to implement antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs for optimal use of antimicrobial(s). However, the evidence supporting a GP pharmacist collaborative AMS implementation model (GPPAS) in primary care remains limited.

With an aim to design a GPPAS model in Australia, this paper outlines how this model will be developed.

This exploratory study undertakes a systematic review, a scoping review, nationwide surveys, and qualitative interviews to design the model. Medical Research Council (MRC) framework and Normalization Process Theory are utilized as guides. Reviews will identify the list of effective GPPAS interventions. Two AMS surveys and paired interviews of GPs and CPs across Australia will explore their convergent and divergent views about the GPPAS interventions, attitudes towards collaboration in AMS and the perceived challenges of implementing GPPAS interventions. Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS 2.0) model and factor analyses will guide the structure of GPPAS model through identifying the determinants of GPPAS uptake. The implementable GPPAS strategies will be selected based on empirical feasibility assessment by AMS stakeholders using the APEASE (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects and safety, Equity) criteria.

The GPPAS model might have potential implications to inform how to better involve GPs and CPs in AMS, and, to improve collaborative services to optimize antimicrobial use and reduce AMR in primary care.

The aim of the present study was to measure stigma among community pharmacists regarding patients with depression, using social distance as a proxy measure. Furthermore, factors influencing stigmatization were identified.

A survey consisting of questions regarding social distance, cognitive attitude components, stereotypical beliefs and behavioural tendencies towards pharmaceutical care for patients with depression was carried out. The survey was completed by 149 community pharmacists with a response rate of 82%. Multiple linear regression analysis was applied to the results of the survey.

Most pharmacists endorsed social distance towards patients with depression. The social distance further increased the more the situation described implied “social closeness”. Age, depression care attitude, the stereotypical belief “danger to others” and the level of involvement pharmacists showed towards patients with depression were found to predict social distance. The present model explains 32.3% of the variance in social distance.

The results showed that community pharmacists have a stigmatizing attitude towards patients with depression. The determinants found to influence these stigmatizing attitudes might be addressed when trying to reduce stigmatization of patients with depression.

Community pharmacies are recognised as an under-utilised, accessible resource that could support the urgent care agenda. This study aimed to provide a snapshot of the number and nature of urgent care requests presented to a sample of community pharmacies in three counties in southern England, to determine how requests are managed, whether management is appropriate, as assessed by a group of experts, and whether customers receiving the care are satisfied with pharmacists’ interventions.

A representative sample of pharmacists across the region was invited to keep a log-book documenting all urgent care requests over a two-week period. Data were analysed to estimate frequency and type of requests and to compare consultations in core and non-core hours. Log-book entries were scrutinised blind by an expert panel to determine appropriateness of pharmacist’s responses. Customers receiving pharmacists’ interventions were surveyed to assess satisfaction.

Seventeen pharmacies kept log-books detailing 432 urgent care consultations, equating to 13 consultations per pharmacy per week. Of these, 70% (n = 302) were dealt with by the pharmacist in-house with 30% (n = 130) resulting in referrals. Locum pharmacists were significantly more likely to refer to other NHS services than regular pharmacists. Over half the requests were for symptom management, skin problems presenting most commonly (38% of all symptoms presented). Forty-seven percent of consultations were considered to have ‘averted the need for other NHS services’. Pharmacists’ referral (but not assessment of urgency) was deemed appropriate by the expert panel in 90% of consultations. Ninety-five percent of customers surveyed were satisfied with the service and would use the pharmacy again.

Extrapolating findings across the study population (approximately 4.4 million) suggests that community pharmacists manage over 11 500 urgent care consultations per week, with 8050 managed independently. These prevent approximately 5400 other NHS encounters, while also meeting customer expectations and expert panel endorsement.

This study aimed to explore community pharmacists’ roles on screening for risk factors, providing safety information-related non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to patients.

NSAIDs are widely dispensed without a prescription from pharmacies in Thailand, while they are frequently reported as causing adverse events.

Self-administered questionnaires were distributed to all accredited pharmacies in Thailand, inviting the main pharmacist in each pharmacy to participate in this study.

Out of 406 questionnaires distributed, 159 were returned (39.2%). Almost all pharmacists claimed to engage in NSAID dispensing practice, but not all of them provided relevant good practice, such as, screening for risk factors (56.3–95.5%), communication on adverse drug reactions (ADRs) (36.9–63.2%) and ADR management (58.9–79.7%), history of gastrointestinal (GI) problems was frequently mentioned for screening, but many pharmacists did not screen for history of NSAID use (24.7–35.5%), older age (45.2–48.9%), concomitant drug (63.7%), and problems of cardiovascular (24.1%), renal (34.9–43.3%), and liver systems (60.3–61.0%). Male pharmacists were significantly less likely to inform users of non-selective NSAIDs about ADRs [odds ratio (OR) 0.44], while provision of information about selective NSAID ADRs was higher among pharmacy owners (OR 2.28), pharmacies with more pharmacists (OR 3.18), and lower in pharmacies with assistants (OR 0.41). Screening for risk factors, and risk communication about NSAIDs were not generally conducted in Thai accredited community pharmacists, nor were NSAID complications fully communicated. Promoting of community pharmacists’ roles in NSAID dispensing should give priority to improving, especially in high-risk patients for taking NSAIDs.