ReviewNurse and pharmacist supplementary prescribing in the UK—A thematic review of the literature
Introduction
Changes within healthcare in recent years have seen a shift in the traditional roles undertaken by healthcare professionals and one of the most significant of these has been the development of non-medical prescribing. Internationally, several healthcare systems now include some form of prescribing by non-medical healthcare professionals, offering potential benefits in terms of increasing patients’ continuity of care and access to medicines, better utilisation of economic and human resources, reductions in patient waiting times and less fragmentation of care [1]. The nursing and pharmacy professions have been at the forefront of these prescribing changes and in the USA, for example, collaborative prescribing by pharmacists and nurses has been possible since the 1970s and, in the United Kingdom (UK), district nurses and health visitors have had limited prescribing rights since the late 1990s. A review of the international pharmacist prescribing literature identified predominantly US studies which reported benefits such as improved compliance and disease control measures, fewer drug interactions, better allocation of resources and economic saving [2], whilst a UK nurse prescribing literature review identified generally positive evaluations amongst both patients and nurse prescribers but identified concerns involving pharmacological knowledge and limitations in prescribable medicines [3].
Rapid changes within healthcare, though, have meant that these reviews did not include more recent non-medical prescribing models such as supplementary prescribing (SP). Introduced in the UK in 2003, this model is a key part of the UK government's plans to revolutionise the delivery of healthcare and offers prescribing rights for several healthcare professions, including nurses, pharmacists and, most recently, physiotherapists, radiographers and optometrists. SP is a dependent model of prescribing, involving a tripartite arrangement between the supplementary prescriber, an independent prescribing doctor and the patient. Following an initial medical diagnosis, SP allows suitably trained healthcare professionals to take prescribing responsibility for patients in accordance with a specific clinical management plan (CMP) [4]. Such is the pace of healthcare reforms in the UK that, as well as SP, nurses and pharmacists can now also undertake independent prescribing (IP). Non-medical training in the UK now involves, for nurses, a single post-graduate independent, extended and supplementary prescribing (IESP) qualification whilst pharmacists, at the time of writing, complete either a SP or an IP conversion course. Despite the development of IP, SP is intended to have a central role in UK healthcare and is argued to be particularly suited to the many patients who have stable, long-term conditions such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Safety is paramount in SP, by virtue of continued medical supervision and the guidelines of the CMP. Such safeguards have meant that SP can be from a full medicines formulary, including controlled and unlicensed drugs. There are around 1200 SP qualified pharmacists (Personal communication, Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain 2007) and around 10,000 nurses qualified to undertake SP or IP [5].
Section snippets
Objectives
The aim in this paper is to review the extant literature relating to nurse and pharmacist SP, given its importance to changing UK healthcare roles and National Health Service (NHS) aims. Specific objectives were to consider issues surrounding the implementation of SP and how it has been perceived and experienced by various healthcare professionals and to describe relevant empirical research relating to SP and identify where additional research is needed. In so doing, it is hoped that this
Scope and method
The intention in this review is to consider both empirical pharmacist and nurse SP research and also opinion and commentary and the grey literature relating to SP. The reason for including such potentially diverse literatures is due mainly to SP being a relatively recent development with as associated lack of empirical research, as previous non-medical prescribing reviews have found [3]. Hence, a thematic rather than systematic review was considered most appropriate and including the grey
Results
Thirty-five empirical research papers were identified: 20 relating to pharmacy [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25] (Table 1), 15 nursing [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40] (Table 2) and 3 papers that concerned both [41], [42], [43] (Table 3). However, several publications reported different aspects of one overall study and data set [12], [13], [29], [30], [31],
Discussion
A descriptive analysis of the SP literature reveals a trend that SP nurse and pharmacist practitioners were positive and generally confident about SP and that it has been successfully implemented in a range of clinical setting in the UK. However, other healthcare professionals and especially doctors appeared more qualified in their assent and also lacked awareness of SP and a range of implementation barriers and challenges were also identified. However, a critical analysis of the emergent
Conclusions
This review of the SP literature has revealed that SP is a model of non-medical prescribing that, although welcomed by non-medical professionals, faces a number of challenges. Some relate to implementation barriers that may be resolved at a local policy level but others such as the development of IP and the apathy of the medical profession, represent more significant threats to the success of this prescribing initiative. Further research is urgently needed in this area of rapid change in
References (72)
- et al.
Nurse lecturers’ observations on aspects of nurse prescribing training
Nurse Education Today
(2006) - et al.
Independent extended supplementary nurse prescribers, their prescribing practice and confidence to educate and assess prescribing students
Nurse Education Today
(2007) - et al.
Independent extended and supplementary nurse prescribing practice in the UK: a national questionnaire survey.
International Journal of Nursing Studies
(2007) Nurse-prescribing in the UK: right but also wrong
The Lancet
(2002)- et al.
Pharmacists and prescribing rights: review of international developments
Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Science
(2005) - et al.
Pharmacist prescribing: review of the literature
Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research
(2004) - et al.
Effectiveness of nurse prescribing: a review of the literature
Journal of Clinical Nursing
(2004) - Department of Health. Supplementary prescribing by nurses, pharmacists, chiropodists/podiatrists, physiotherapists and...
Numbers of nurse prescribers rises
Nursing Times
(November 2006)- et al.
A survey of supplementary prescribing pharmacists from the Sunderland Pharmacy School
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
(2006)
Pharmacist supplementary prescribing: a preliminary qualitative exploration
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Health care professionals’ views on hospital pharmacist prescribing in the United Kingdom
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Hospital doctors’ perceived barriers to pharmacist prescribing
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Hospital nurses’ perceptions of pharmacist prescribing
British Journal of Nursing
Perceptions and perceived competencies of pharmacists on supplementary prescribing training courses in London and the South East
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Supplementary prescribing: early experiences of pharmacists in the UK
The Annals of Pharmacotherapy
Benefits and challenges of prescribing training and implementation: perceptions and early experiences of RPSGB prescribers
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Supplementary prescribing by pharmacists in England
American Journal of Health Systems Pharmacy
Perceived professional barriers between community pharmacists and GPs: a qualitative assessment
British Journal of General Practice
Implementing supplementary prescribing—a baseline survey by the National Prescribing Centre
Pharmaceutical Journal
An exploratory qualitative study views of supplementary prescribing
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Pharmacists’ and mentors’ views on the introduction of pharmacist supplementary prescribing: a qualitative evaluation of views and context
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Views of hospital nurses on hospital pharmacist supplementary prescribing
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Views of junior house officers/senior house officers on pharmacist supplementary prescribing
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Comparison of supplementary prescribers’ and doctors’ compliance with guidelines for drug dosing in haemofiltration on an intensive care unit
Pharmaceutical Journal
Patient's experience of pharmacist-led supplementary prescribing in primary care
Pharmaceutical Journal
Attitudes of successful candidates of supplementary prescribing courses to their training and their extended roles
The Pharmaceutical Journal
Exploring innovations in pharmacy practice: a qualitative evaluation of supplementary prescribing by pharmacists
Views of community pharmacists regarding supplementary prescribing
International Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Doctor's views on supervising nurse prescribers
Prescriber
Attitudes towards, and information needs in relation to, supplementary nurse prescribing in the UK: an empirical study
Journal of Clinical Nursing
Preparing nurses to prescribe medicines for patients with dermatological conditions
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Mental health nurse supplementary prescribing: mapping progress 1 year after implementation
Psychiatric Bulletin
Supplementary nurse prescribing
Nursing Standard
An emerging picture of mental health nurses as non medical prescribers
Nurse Prescribing
A survey of nurse supplementary prescribing implementation in primary and secondary care in England
Cited by (79)
A modified-Delphi study of a framework to support the potential implementation of pharmacist prescribing
2020, Research in Social and Administrative PharmacyCAPABLE: Calgary zone usage of Additional Prescribing Authorization By pharmacists in an inpatient setting: review of the prescribing Landscape and Environment
2020, Research in Social and Administrative PharmacyA mixed methods exploration of physiotherapist's approaches to analgesic use among patients with hip osteoarthritis
2019, Physiotherapy (United Kingdom)Citation Excerpt :However, perceived barriers to physiotherapists working in other extended roles, including the use of injection therapy and acupuncture for pregnancy-related low back pain, have been identified as concerns over litigation, lack of confidence and fear of adverse reactions [34,35], mirroring the findings of this study. Also supporting our findings, similar barriers (professional factors, training, and system factors (e.g. support to upskill) [29,36]) and perceived benefits (higher quality care, and more choice and convenience for patients [17]) of non-medic independent prescribing have been found among nurses and pharmacists. Although physiotherapists address analgesia needs with patients with hip OA, this is predominantly via signposting to the GP.
National Medicine Policies Impacting on Pharmacy Practice
2019, Encyclopedia of Pharmacy Practice and Clinical Pharmacy: Volumes 1-3Prescribing: Practices, Standards, Ethics, Behaviors, and Competencies: A Case Study in Alberta
2019, Encyclopedia of Pharmacy Practice and Clinical Pharmacy: Volumes 1-3Non-medical prescribing assessment - An evaluation of a nationally agreed multi method approach
2016, Nurse Education in PracticeCitation Excerpt :This may reflect a change in practice since the extension of independent prescribing legislation, or may be a reflection of the change in student demographics from primary to secondary care. Although previous research has supported the view that supplementary prescribing may be beneficial for novice prescribers (Cooper et al., 2008) it is generally viewed a cumbersome form of prescribing which has the potential to restrict practice (Courtenay et al., 2012; Courtenay and Carey, 2008). This research has provided further evidence that supplementary prescribing may no longer be a necessary form of prescribing for non-medical prescribers.