Using theory to predict implementation of a physician-pharmacist collaborative intervention within a practice-based research network.

Demik DE, Vander Weg MW, Lundt ES, Coffey CS, Ardery G, Carter BL. Using theory to predict implementation of a physician-pharmacist collaborative intervention within a practice-based research network. Research in social & administrative pharmacy : RSAP. 2013 Nov 1; 9(6):719-30.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated that physician/pharmacist collaboration can improve management of chronic conditions. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a correlation exists between existing clinical pharmacy services within a practice-based research network (PBRN) and provider attitudes and beliefs regarding implementing a new pharmacy intervention based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). METHODS: A validated survey was completed by one clinical pharmacist from each office. This instrument evaluated the current clinical pharmacy services provided in the medical office. TPB instruments were developed that measured beliefs concerning implementation of a clinical pharmacy intervention for either blood pressure or asthma. The pharmacy services and TPB surveys were then administered to physicians and pharmacists in 32 primary care offices throughout the United States. RESULTS: Physicians returned 321 (35.9%) surveys, while pharmacists returned 40 (75.5%). The Cronbach's alpha coefficients generally ranged from 0.65 to 0.98. TPB subscale scores were lower in offices rated with lower pharmacy service scores, but these differences were not statistically significant. There was no correlation between clinical pharmacy service score and providers' TPB subscale scores. In both the hypertension and asthma groups, pharmacists scores were significantly higher than physicians' scores on the attitudes subscale in the multivariate analysis (P  <  0.001 and P  <  0.05, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacists consistently scored higher than physicians on the TPB, indicating that they felt the hypertension or asthma intervention would be more straightforward for them to implement than did physicians. There was no significant correlation between clinical pharmacy service scores and attitudes toward implementing a future physician/pharmacist collaborative intervention using the TPB. Future studies should investigate the ability of the TPB instrument to predict implementation of a similar intervention in offices of physicians never exposed to clinical pharmacy services.