Bukic J, Kuzmanic B, Rusic D, Portolan M, Mihanovic A, Seselja Perisin A, Leskur D, Petric A, Bozic J, Tomic S, Modun D. Community pharmacists' use, perception and knowledge on dietary supplements: a cross sectional study.
Pharm Pract (Granada) 2021;
19:2251. [PMID:
33727993 PMCID:
PMC7939115 DOI:
10.18549/pharmpract.2021.1.2251]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2020] [Accepted: 02/21/2021] [Indexed: 01/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Background:
Pharmacists are commonly tasked with recommending the appropriate dietary
supplement and advising the patients of their correct and safe use. Previous
research, conducted on pharmacy students, showed that they did not always
use the evidence based sources of information, with personal use identified
as a significant predictor influencing the decision to recommend a
supplement.
Objectives:
To compare use, perceptions and knowledge of dietary supplements of
pharmacists with different years of work experience and to explore factors
that could influence their recommendation of supplements.
Methods:
A questionnaire based cross-sectional study was conducted on Croatian
community pharmacists in September 2017. The questionnaire explored
pharmacists’ demographic characteristics, use, perceptions and
knowledge of dietary supplements. Pharmacists (N=102) were divided in two
groups based on their work experience: P0 (<10 years) and P1
(≥10 years).
Results:
All included pharmacists had high knowledge scores without differences
between groups (P0=10, IQR 9-12 vs P1=11, IQR 9-12, expressed as median and
interquartile range (IQR), p=0.275). Less experienced pharmacists perceived
there was less research conducted on the dietary supplements compared to
their more experienced counterparts (P0=1, IQR 1-2 vs P1=2, IQR 2-3,
expressed as median and interquartile range, p<0.001). Groups
differed in sources used when choosing the appropriate supplement with P0
using higher quality sources such as systematic reviews in comparison to P1
(32.1% vs 8.7%, p=0.004). Pharmacists’ decision to
recommend a dietary supplement was influenced by their personal use (odds
ratio 0.216, 95%CI 0.068:0.689, p=0.01) and work experience (odds
ratio 0.154, 95%CI 0.045:0.530, p=0.003).
Conclusions:
Pharmacists did not use the high quality sources when recommending dietary
supplements and their decision to recommend the supplement was not based on
objective evaluation of evidence. Further education about the practice of
evidence-based pharmacy is necessary, with special emphasis on senior
pharmacists who might have missed that aspect during their formal
education.
Collapse