Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/32758
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGidman, Wendyen_UK
dc.contributor.authorWard, Paulen_UK
dc.contributor.authorMcGregor, Lesley Men_UK
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-24T00:05:27Z-
dc.date.available2021-06-24T00:05:27Z-
dc.date.issued2012-01en_UK
dc.identifier.othere000939en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/32758-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To apply sociological theories to understand public trust in extended services provided by community pharmacists relative to those provided by general practitioners (GPs). Design: Qualitative study involving focus groups with members of the public. Setting: The West of Scotland. Participants: 26 purposively sampled members of the public were involved in one of five focus groups. The groups were composed to represent known groups of users and non-users of community pharmacy, namely mothers with young children, seniors and men. Results: Trust was seen as being crucial in healthcare settings. Focus group discussions revealed that participants were inclined to draw unfavourable comparisons between pharmacists and GPs. Importantly, participants' trust in GPs was greater than that in pharmacists. Participants considered pharmacists to be primarily involved in medicine supply, and awareness of the pharmacist's extended role was low. Participants were often reluctant to trust pharmacists to deliver unfamiliar services, particularly those perceived to be ‘high risk’. Numerous system-based factors were identified, which reinforce patient trust and confidence in GPs, including GP registration and appointment systems, GPs' expert/gatekeeper role and practice environments. Our data indicate that the nature and context of public interactions with GPs fostered familiarity with a specific GP or practice, which allowed interpersonal trust to develop. By contrast, participants' exposure to community pharmacists was limited. Additionally, a good understanding of the GPs' level of training and role promoted confidence. Conclusion: Current UK initiatives, which aim to implement a range of pharmacist-led services, are undermined by lack of public trust. It seems improbable that the public will trust pharmacists to deliver unfamiliar services, which are perceived to be ‘high risk’, unless health systems change in a way that promotes trust in pharmacists. This may be achieved by increasing the quality and quantity of patient interactions with pharmacists and gaining GP support for extended pharmacy services.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Groupen_UK
dc.relationGidman W, Ward P & McGregor LM (2012) Understanding public trust in services provided by community pharmacists relative to those provided by general practitioners: a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 2 (3), Art. No.: e000939. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012-000939en_UK
dc.rights© 2012, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/en_UK
dc.titleUnderstanding public trust in services provided by community pharmacists relative to those provided by general practitioners: a qualitative studyen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bmjopen-2012-000939en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid22586286en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleBMJ Openen_UK
dc.citation.issn2044-6055en_UK
dc.citation.volume2en_UK
dc.citation.issue3en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.contributor.funderMedical Research Councilen_UK
dc.citation.date14/05/2012en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Strathclydeen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationFlinders Universityen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity College Londonen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000315044800055en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-84862172632en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1399429en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-7093-1391en_UK
dc.date.accepted2012-03-15en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2012-03-15en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2019-09-13en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorGidman, Wendy|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorWard, Paul|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMcGregor, Lesley M|0000-0002-7093-1391en_UK
local.rioxx.projectProject ID unknown|Medical Research Council|http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000265en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2021-06-23en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/|2021-06-23|en_UK
local.rioxx.filenamee000939.full.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
local.rioxx.source2044-6055en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
e000939.full.pdfFulltext - Published Version181.26 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.