A theoretically informed survey of the views and experiences of practicing pharmacists on research conduct, dissemination and translation.
Stewart, Derek C.
Gibson Smith, Kathrine Lesley
Rushworth, Gordon F.
MetadataShow full item record
STEWART, D., CUNNINGHAM, S., STRATH, A., MACLURE, A., GIBSON-SMITH, K., RUSHWORTH, G.F., DREISCHULTE, T., NICOLSON, C., PFLEGER, D., TIERNAN, D. and MACLURE, K. 2018. A theoretically informed survey of the views and experiences of practicing pharmacists on research conduct, dissemination and translation. Research in social and administrative pharmacy [online], In Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.12.005
Background: While studies have reported pharmacists’ perspectives of research involvement, almost all are limited by sector, have little focus on research translation and have not incorporated behavior change theory. Objective: To determine pharmacists’ views and experiences of research conduct, dissemination and translation. Methods: This was an electronic cross-sectional survey of pharmacists across six Scottish health board areas. Survey items were: demographics; research activities (e.g. conduct, dissemination) in the last two years; research interests, experience and confidence in research tasks (e.g. proposal writing, data collection); and Likert statements on research conduct and dissemination, and translating research findings to practice. Conduct/dissemination and translation items were based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and principal component analysis (PCA) of TDF items. Following determination of internal consistency, scores for each component were calculated. Results: The response rate was 19.4% (136/701), with 17 (12.5%) currently involved in research. Responses were more positive for interest in research than experience or confidence. PCA of research conduct/dissemination items identified three internally reliable components of support/opportunities, motivation/outcomes, and roles/characteristics. Component scores for support/opportunities to participate in research were most negative. PCA of translation items identified three internally reliable components of current practices/abilities, consequences and support. Scores for all three components were positive, being most positive for consequences of research translation. Those in secondary care, with a postgraduate qualification and prescribers scored higher for interest, experience, confidence, and for most components (p<0.05). Conclusion: A minority of pharmacists are involved in the research conduct/dissemination and these are more likely to be highly qualified individuals based in secondary care. Given the need to develop and evaluate new models of pharmaceutical care, involvement should be extended to all practice settings. Study findings could be used to develop behavior change interventions targeting individuals and organizations.