Intra and Inter-professional working: how have pharmacists’ working practices changed during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction COVID-19 has acted as a catalyst for radical changes in the working practices of pharmacists. While there is emerging evidence of adaptability mitigating burnout amongst pharmacists in other countries (1), what has yet to be established is the extent to which the well-being and resilience of pharmacists in the UK may be supported through changes in intra and inter-professional working practices. Aim As part of a wider project aiming to explore the impact of COVID-19 on pharmacists’ wellbeing and resilience, in this abstract we present findings exploring the impact on working relationships within pharmacy and multidisciplinary teams. Methods An online questionnaire containing validated measures of wellbeing and resilience and free-text open questions exploring the impact of COVID-19 on working practices was piloted on five practising pharmacists. This questionnaire was subsequently distributed via social media and professional networks in June 2020. Convenience sampling was used whereby any UK-registered pharmacist in a patient-facing role was eligible to take part. Inductive thematic analysis of the free text responses was conducted. This abstract presents one key theme; intra and inter-professional relationships. Results A total of 202 questionnaires were completed (Table 1), with 192 participants entering free-text responses. Participants reported pharmacy teams becoming closer, supporting one another and working more cohesively. Work redesign and staff upskilling were given as positive examples of practice change in response to the pandemic. Reported challenges included managing conflict within a team due to heightened stress, sustaining staff morale, exhaustion, and prioritising others to the detriment of their own wellbeing: “I have no time for myself as I'm too busy keeping the day to day working and supporting my team emotionally. I'm emotionally exhausted and at home I withdraw and ignore the outside world as I'm at breaking point but don’t want my colleagues to see this.” Inter-professional relationships sometimes improved as a result of more effective communication, extended networking and pharmacists feeling valued and recognised as integral to multidisciplinary working. Supportive inter-professional working was described as a “Great sense of comradery - we're in this together”. Yet for others, inter-professional working proved challenging, with non-engagement of clinicians, frequently changing guidance from senior management, and restricted staff interaction due to remote or shift working. Conclusions Whilst for some the pandemic facilitated improved inter- and intra- professional interactions, for others this was viewed as challenges of daily practice. Due to recruiting via social media, this study is limited by the response numbers and is therefore not representative of all UK registered pharmacists. However, a key strength is that pharmacists from all sectors of practice responded, in comparison to other studies which have focused solely on community pharmacists. Results from this study can be used to support sustainable change in fostering collaborative working within pharmacy and multi-professional healthcare teams. References 1. Austin, Z., & Gregory, P. (2020). Resilience in the time of pandemic: The experience of community pharmacists in Ontario during COVID-19. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».