Perceptions of community pharmacists to implementing technologies in the workplace: an exploratory study

Evaluating digital competencies for pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Digital technologies are widely used in healthcare. In the UK, Health Education England developed a framework on digital capabilities so that healthcare professionals could determine their health literacy, evaluate their competencies and identify their learning needs. For pharmacists, specific digital capabilities were developed - Digital Capabilities for the Pharmacy Workforce.

AIM

The aim of this study was to explore the views of pharmacists on digital competency in the workplace and evaluate the suitability of the Digital Capabilities Framework for the Pharmacy Workforce for use within clinical practice.

METHODOLOGY

A focus group of experienced pharmacists working within the NHS in the UK was conducted and thematic analysis of the content was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seven pharmacy staff took part in an online focus group. They held senior positions across various London NHS hospitals and in community settings. From the content of the focus group, four themes were identified: Theme 1 - Use of digital technology, Theme 2 - Digital competency and training of the pharmacy workforce, Theme 3 - Assessment of digital competency and Theme 4 - Evaluation of the Digital Capabilities Framework for the Pharmacy Workforce. The pharmacists in this study suggested that the Digital Capabilities Framework could be used as a helpful assessment tool to ensure that all staff should have the appropriate digital skills and capabilities to fulfil their pharmacy role.

CONCLUSION

With widespread use of digital technologies in practice, there is a need for formal digital technology training for pharmacists. The Digital Capabilities Framework has the potential to be utilised as an assessment tool to ensure pharmacy staff have the appropriate levels of digital skills to fulfil their clinical duties and make their service more efficient.

Assessing the digital literacy levels of the community pharmacy workforce using a survey tool

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the digital literacy of staff in London, UK, community pharmacies and to explore their perceptions about the use of eHealth tools.

METHODS

The study population was community pharmacy staff (N = 21,346) in Greater London. A survey tool was divided into six sections: Use of the internet; Use of social media; Use of mobile health applications (MHAs); Perception of and practical use of digital health tools; Scenario-based questions and demographics. Responses were analysed in SPSS. Following data collection, Health Education England's (HEE's) Digital Capabilities Framework (DCF) was published. The authors mapped the survey tool retrospectively to the framework.

KEY FINDINGS

Almost all respondents (98.0%, n = 551/562) used eHealth tools at work, mainly to access medicine information (89.8%, n = 495/551). Almost one-third (31.7%, N = 178/562) used social media regularly, while many (79.4%, N = 446/562) were aware of MHAs. Self-perceived digital literacy indicated that 63.3% (n = 356/562) deemed themselves to be above average. Under 35s rated their digital literacy more highly than over 35s (P < 0.001). HEE's DCF indicated that actual digital literacy was lower than that of self-perceived. Despite the high use of eHealth tools, respondents were reluctant to recommend these to the public for health advice.

CONCLUSIONS

Community pharmacy staff self-report their digital literacy to be high yet do not use these skills for public health purposes. Furthermore, these self-reported skills appear to be over-estimated. Despite high levels of use of digital tools at work, staff do not use them for public health, therefore, further training to build confidence to better utilise them is recommended.

Investigating the Usability, Efficacy and Accuracy of a Medication Entering Software System for a Healthcare Robot

Purpose: This research aimed to evaluate medication software for a healthcare robot. Study I compared two software versions (RoboGen and RoboGen2) for system usability, speed and accuracy of medication entry; Study II evaluated system usability and community pharmacists' views of RoboGen2. Methods: Study I had a within-subjects experimental design and recruited 40 Health Sciences students to enter different, comparable sets of prescriptions into the two systems, in randomized order, within a limit of 15 min. Screen activity was recorded to observe prescription errors. Study II had a cross-sectional observational design and recruited 20 community pharmacists using convenience sampling. Pharmacists entered three prescriptions using RoboGen2. Participants in both studies completed the System Usability Scale (SUS) following each task. Study I participants completed a questionnaire on system preference, and Study II participants a semi-structured interview. Results: Study I participants preferred Robogen2 (p < 0.001) due to its sleek and modern layout, good flow, ease of use, and intuitive design. SUS scores [t (40) = -3.40, p = 0.002] and speed of medication entry favored Robogen2 (t = 3.65, p < 0.001). No significance was found in accuracy (t = 1.12, p = 0.27). In study 2, pharmacists rated the usability of RoboGen2 below average. Themes from interviews were navigation and streamlining the system, ease of use, and integration with pharmacy software systems. Conclusion: Adding safety features and better aesthetics can improve the usability and safety of a medication prescription system. Streamlining workflow and pre-populating data can increase speed of prescription entry without compromising patient safety. However, a better approach is integration with pre-existing pharmacy systems to reduce workload while incorporating safety features built into existing dispensing systems.