Exploring pharmacist experience and acceptance for debunking health misinformation in the social media

Introduction: The increasing evidence of misinformation on pharmacy issues in Social Media (SM) may provide potential for pharmacist involvement. Aim: This study aims at exploring pharmacist experience and acceptance to debunk pharmacy misinformation in SM. Methods: Four Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with 41 selected pharmacists were conducted. The FGDs collected participant’s experience with misinformation, action taken and participant’s acceptance for debunking misinformation. The FGDs were audio recorded, subsequently transcribed and thematically analysed. Results: The majority of respondents often clarified the misinformation. Pharmacist motivation, relationship with the sender, opportunities to response and ability to respond the misleading message are themes determining pharmacist acceptance for debunking misinformation in SM. Conclusion: Pharmacist has the potential to contain and prevent misinformation about health and pharmacy issues in SM.

Initial Pharmacist Experience with the Ontario-Based MedsCheck Program

Background: On April 1, 2007, community pharmacists in Ontario began providing a new medication review service called MedsCheck. MedsCheck is intended to help patients better understand their medication therapy, ensure that medications are being taken as prescribed and establish a medication history. This study explored the initial experiences with MedsCheck and identified barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of the service. Methods: This was a sequential, explanatory, mixed-methods study. Community pharmacists practising in Hamilton, Ontario, completed a semi-structured mailed survey. A subsample of participants also participated in a semi-structured telephone interview. Results: A total of 88 pharmacists returned the survey and 13 participated in an interview. Respondents reported that it took an average of 30 minutes (standard deviation 11.2; range 10–60 minutes) to complete a MedsCheck. Barriers to providing the service included lack of time, physical space and patient awareness of and interest in the service. Facilitators included pharmacist overlap coverage, scheduling reviews during slower times, personally inviting patients to participate, reducing paperwork and using electronic or paper-based tools. Discussion: The MedsCheck program was well received. However, numerous barriers to its implementation were identified, most notably lack of time and a workflow that is not conducive to an appointment-based, 30-minute service. Further research suggests this time estimate may be low. Changes within the pharmacy could improve the implementation of this service. Conclusion: This study provided information on how to facilitate the implementation of MedsCheck. The results of this study can help pharmacists to improve the delivery of MedsCheck or similar services in community pharmacies.