Background: Strong working relationships between pharmacists and physicians are needed to optimize patient care. Understanding attitudes and barriers to collaboration between pharmacists and physicians may help with delivery of primary health care services. The objective of this study was to capture the opinions of family physicians and community pharmacists in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) regarding collaborative practice. Methods: Two parallel surveys were offered to all community pharmacists and family physicians in NL. Surveys assessed the following: attitudes and experience with collaborative practice, preferred communication methods, perceived role of pharmacists, areas for more collaboration and barriers to collaborative practice. Results for both groups were analyzed separately, with comparisons between groups to compare responses with similar questions. Results: Survey response rates were 78.6% and 7.1% for pharmacists and physicians, respectively. Both groups overwhelmingly agreed that collaborative practice could result in improved patient outcomes and agreed that major barriers were lack of time and compensation and the need to deal with multiple pharmacists/physicians. Physicians indicated they would like more collaboration for insurance approvals and patient counselling, while pharmacists want to assist with identifying and managing patients’ drug-related problems. Both groups want more collaboration to improve patient adherence. Conclusion: Both groups agree that collaborative practice can positively affect patient outcomes and would like more collaboration opportunities. However, physicians and pharmacists disagree about the areas where they would like to collaborate to deliver care. Changes to reimbursement models and infrastructure are needed to facilitate enhanced collaboration between pharmacists and physicians in the community setting.

Background: Pharmacists are consistently ranked among the most trusted professionals, and research shows high levels of satisfaction with pharmacist services. Studies have also shown that the public is generally unaware of the full range of roles and responsibilities of a pharmacist. The purpose of this study was to explore the public’s knowledge and attitudes regarding the role of the community pharmacist and to determine their likelihood of using expanded pharmacist services. Methods: Adults across Newfoundland and Labrador were surveyed by telephone. Survey questions addressed how frequently participants visited the pharmacy, understanding of duties undertaken by pharmacists, perceptions and attitudes regarding pharmacists as health care professionals, likelihood of using expanded pharmacist services and participant demographics. Comparisons were made between responses from urban and rural participants and frequent versus nonfrequent pharmacy users, to determine if there were any differences. Results: The majority of participants were generally aware of what pharmacists do when filling prescriptions; those who visited the pharmacy more frequently appeared to be more informed. Participants indicated they would take advantage of the expanded services suggested, with greatest interest in receiving advice for minor ailment management and prescription refills from pharmacists. Results support the prevailing view that pharmacists are trusted health professionals who should have access to patients’ health information to provide best care. Conclusion: The public is aware of aspects of the pharmacist’s role, but opportunities exist to better educate the public on the knowledge, skills and unique professional abilities of pharmacists to support uptake of expanded pharmacist services.

Background: There is a need for acceptable and feasible HIV testing options to ensure people living with HIV know their status so they can access care. Pharmacist-provided HIV point-of-care testing (POCT) may overcome testing barriers, including privacy concerns, testing wait times, and improve accessibility. In the APPROACH study, we aimed to develop and assess an HIV POCT program in community pharmacies for future scale up and evaluation. This paper describes the program uptake, participant and pharmacist experiences, and implementation factors. Methods: A pharmacist-provided HIV POCT program was offered in 4 pharmacies in two Canadian provinces. A mixed methods design incorporated self-report questionnaire data, participant telephone interviews, pharmacist focus groups, workload analysis, and situational analysis to assess the uptake, acceptability and feasibility of the HIV POCT program. Results: Over the 6-month pilot, 123 HIV tests were performed. One new case of HIV was identified; this participant was linked with confirmatory testing and HIV care. Participants were predominantly male (76%), with a mean age of 35 years. This was the first HIV test for 27% participants, and 75% were at moderate to very high risk of undiagnosed HIV infection, by Denver HIV Risk Score. Questionnaires and telephone interviews showed participants were very satisfied with the program; 99% agreed HIV POCT should be routinely offered in pharmacies and 78% were willing to pay for the service. Participants felt the pharmacy was convenient, discreet, and that the pharmacist was supportive and provided education about how to reduce their future risk. Pharmacists felt prepared, confident, and expressed professional satisfaction with offering HIV POCT. Community and public health supports, clear linkage to care plans to refer participants with positive HIV POCT results, and provision of counselling tools were important enabling factors for the program. Pharmacist remuneration, integration with existing healthcare systems, and support for ongoing promotion of HIV POCT availability in pharmacies were identified as needs for future scale-up and sustainability. Conclusions: A successful model of pharmacy-based POCT, including linkage to care, was developed. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this approach in finding new diagnoses and linking them with care. Trial registration: Retrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03210701) on July 6, 2017.

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a highly effective way to reduce virus transmission. There have been increasing calls to improve access to PrEP in Canada. One way to improve access is by having more prescribers available. The objective of this study was to determine target users’ acceptance of a PrEP-prescribing service by pharmacists in Nova Scotia. Methods: A triangulation, mixed-methods study was conducted consisting of an online survey and qualitative interviews underpinned by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) constructs (affective attitude, burden, ethicality, intervention coherence, opportunity cost, perceived effectiveness and self-efficacy). Participants were those eligible for PrEP in Nova Scotia (men who have sex with men or transgender women, persons who inject drugs and HIV-negative individuals in serodiscordant relationships). Descriptive statistics and ordinal logistic regression were used to analyze survey data. Interview data were deductively coded according to each TFA construct and then inductively coded to determine themes within each construct. Results: A total of 148 responses were captured by the survey, and 15 participants were interviewed. Participants supported pharmacists’ prescribing PrEP across all TFA constructs from both survey and interview data. Identified concerns related to pharmacists’ abilities to order and view lab results, pharmacists’ knowledge and skills for sexual health and the potential for experiencing stigma within pharmacy settings. Conclusion: A pharmacist-led PrEP-prescribing service is acceptable to eligible populations in Nova Scotia. The feasibility of PrEP prescribing by pharmacists should be pursued as an intervention to increase access to PrEP.

Background: Sustainable implementation of new professional services into clinical practice can be difficult. In 2019, a population-wide initiative called SaferMedsNL was implemented across the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), to promote appropriate medication use. Two evidence-based interventions were adapted to the context of NL to promote deprescribing of proton pump inhibitors and sedatives. The objective of this study was to identify and prioritize which actions supported the implementation of deprescribing in community practice for pharmacists, physicians and nurse practitioners across the province. Methods: Community pharmacists, physicians and nurse practitioners were invited to participate in virtual focus groups. Nominal Group Technique was used to elicit responses to the question: “What actions support the implementation of deprescribing into the daily workflow of your practice?” Participants prioritized actions within each group while thematic analysis permitted comparison across groups. Results: Five focus groups were held in fall 2020 involving pharmacists ( n = 11), physicians ( n = 7) and nurse practitioners ( n = 4). Participants worked in rural ( n = 10) and urban ( n = 12) settings. The different groups agreed on what the top 5 actions were, with the top 5 receiving 68% of the scores: (1) providing patient education, (2) allocating time and resources, (3) building interprofessional collaboration and communication, (4) fostering patient relationships and (5) aligning with public awareness strategies. Conclusion: Pharmacists, physicians and nurse practitioners identified similar actions that supported implementing evidence-based deprescribing into routine clinical practice. Sharing these strategies may help others embed deprescribing into daily practice and assist the uptake of medication appropriateness initiatives by front-line providers. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2024;157:xx-xx.