4.6 Article

Use of community pharmacies: a population-based survey

Journal

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages 254-262

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdi032

Keywords

community pharmacies; prescription medicines; OTC medicines; advice

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Community pharmacies are widely used in the UK, but the services they provide are changing, with pharmacists expected to take on wider roles and responsibilities. The impact of such changes will partly depend on who uses pharmacies and their illnesses. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey of a stratified random sample of 10 000 adults aged 35 years plus. Results In the previous month, 59 per cent of respondents had collected a prescription medicine and 40 per cent had purchased an over-the-counter (OTC) medicine from a pharmacy, whereas only 12 per cent had asked for advice. Women were more likely to have obtained medicine or asked for advice (76 per cent), but nearly two-thirds of men had done so (63 per cent). Poor self-rated health was the key factor in obtaining medicine, both on prescription and OTC. Purchasers of OTC medicine were more likely to be younger and from higher socio-economic classes, whereas those who collected prescription medicine were more likely to be older, feel at risk of vascular health problems and non-smokers. Medicines to treat cold and flu symptoms were the most frequently reported purchase type. Only a small number of respondents who asked for advice had not also obtained medicine. Respondents who asked for advice were more likely to have asked about a specific medicine or illness than to have asked for general health advice. Conclusion Whilst those with poorer health are more likely to visit, a wide range of ages and social classes visit pharmacies each month. This provides an opportunity for public health initiatives to be delivered in pharmacies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available