Abstract
Objective Using a self-reported work sampling methodology this study investigated how community pharmacists utilised their time, and quantified how much time pharmacists devoted to specific activities. Setting Community pharmacies (n = 30) in the Greater Belfast area. Method A classification system was developed to define all activities (professional, semi-professional, and non-professional tasks) which could potentially be performed by a community pharmacist in the course of a normal working day (from 9.00 to 6.00 pm). A random bleeper device was used which was programmed to bleep randomly approximately 13 times per day (over 12 days) at which time the pharmacist recorded their precise activity (using the classification system) at that time on a proforma. All completed data sheets for each pharmacy were entered into an Excel® spreadsheet, where the number of observations for each activity was expressed as a proportion of the total number of observations per day. Statistical analysis was carried out in SPSS, comparing these data to similar data which had been collected in 1998. Results Pharmacists in this study were found to spend approximately 49% of their time engaged in professional activities, 31% in semi-professional activities and 20% involved in non-professional activities which was similar to that reported in 1998. Most time was spent on assembly and labelling of products, whilst staff training occupied the least amount of pharmacists’ time. Pharmacists with a prescription volume of less than 1,499 per month spent significantly more time counselling patients on OTC medicines and responding to symptoms than those dispensing 1,500 items/month or more (P = 0.027). Pharmacists who employed a pre-registration student apportioned less time to the assembly and labelling of products compared to those without a student (P = 0.08). Pharmacists with three or more staff spent less time on coding and endorsing of prescriptions compared to those with less staff (P = 0.086). Conclusion Pharmacists in this study are spending more time checking prescriptions (essential component of pharmaceutical care) and are still managing to spend only 20% of their time on non-professional activities. However, there had been relatively little change in the way in which pharmacists in this sample spent their time compared to a previous study.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Hepler CD, Strand LM. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1990;47:533–43.
Bell HM, McElnay JC, Hughes CM. A self-reported work sampling study in community pharmacy practice. Pharm World Sci. 1999;21:210–6.
Bell H, McElnay J, Hughes C, Woods A. A qualitative investigation of the attitudes and opinions of community pharmacists to pharmaceutical care. J Soc Adm Pharm. 1998;15:284–95.
Mobach M. The general pharmacy work explored in The Netherlands. Pharm World Sci. 2008;30:353–9.
Rascati KL, Kimberlin CL, McCormick WC. Work measurement in pharmacy research. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1986;43(10):2445–52.
Rutter PM, Brown D, Jones IF. Pharmacy research: the place of work measurement. Int J Pharm Pract. 1998;6:46–58.
Roberts MJ, Kvalseth TO, Jermstad RL. Work measurement in hospital pharmacy. Top Hosp Pharm Manag. 1982;2:1–17.
Fisher CM, Corrigan OI, Henman MC. A study of community pharmacy practice: pharmacists’ work patterns. J Soc Adm Pharm. 1999;8(1):15–24.
Emmerton L, Jefferson K. Work sampling observation of community pharmacists: a review. Int J Pharm Pract. 1996;4:75–8.
National Health Service Pharmacy Education and Development Committee Nationally recognised framework for final accuracy checking of dispensed items for pharmacy technicians. http://www.nicpld.org/courses/techAccred/assets/ACT_framework.pdf. Accessed 31 March 2010.
McCann L, Hughes C, Adair C. An exploration of work-related stress in Northern Ireland community pharmacy: a qualitative study. Int J Pharm Pract. 2009;17:261–7.
Watson M, Blenkinsopp A. Pharmacy support staff need ongoing training if goals are to be realised. Pharm J. 2003;271:738.
Svarstad BL, Bultman DC, Mount JK. Patient counselling provided in community pharmacies: effects of state regulation, pharmacist age, and busyness. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2004;44(1):22–9.
Ried LD, West TE, Martin P, Force W. Multidimensional work sampling to study the activities of decentralized clinical pharmacists. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1991;48:1211–9.
Emmerton L, Becket G, Gillbanks L. The application of electronic work sampling technology in New Zealand community pharmacy. J Soc Adm Pharm. 1998;15(3):191–200.
Ampt A, Westbrook J, Creswick N, Mallock N. A comparison of self-reported and observational work sampling techniques for measuring time in nursing tasks. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12:18–24.
Nickman NA, Guerro R, Bair J. Self-reported work-sampling methods for evaluating pharmaceutical services. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1990;47:1611–7.
Hagerty BK, Chang RS, Spengler CD. Work sampling: analyzing nursing staff productivity. J Nurs Adm. 1985;15:9–14.
Rutter R. Work sampling: as a win/win management tool. Ind Eng. 1994;26:30–1.
O’Donnell K, McLean G, Grant S, McKelvie M, Mair F, Watt G, et al. The new GMS contract in primary care: the impact of governance and incentives. 2009. http://www.nhsconfed.org/documents/thenewGMScontractinprimarycare. Accessed 9 July 2009.
Bond C, Blenkinsopp A, Inch J, Celino G, Gray N. The effect of the new community pharmacy contract on the community pharmacy workforce. Pharmacy Practice Research Trust. http://www.pprt.org.uk/Documents/TrustNews/The_effect_of_the_new_community_pharmacy_contract_on_the_community_pharmacy_workforce.pdf. Accessed 31 March 2010.
Acknowledgements
We thank all pharmacists who took part in the work sampling study.
Funding
This study was funded under a studentship provided to Laura McCann from the Northern Ireland Centre for Pharmacy Learning and Development (NICPLD).
Conflicts of interest
None declared.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McCann, L., Hughes, C.M. & Adair, C.G. A self-reported work-sampling study in community pharmacy practice: a 2009 update. Pharm World Sci 32, 536–543 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9405-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-010-9405-x