Table 4 Main themes and sub-themes to emerge from interviews with pharmacy staff related to conducting diabetes risk assessments

Time constraints

Training

Only selected staff were allocated time to complete the training. Therefore, if they haven’t completed the training, they may just completed BP check

Training/ access to equipment

By the scheduled start date for the pilot phase, some pharmacies were still waiting on a RGBT meter and training regarding its use

Length of assessment (pharmacy staff)

Total health check more likely to take >5 or <5 minutes

Therefore, an appointment often had to be made to complete (>5 minutes)

Pharmacy staff

If staff had limited time, often only a BP check would be completed

Length of assessment (participants)

Limited available time of participants affected the number of diabetes risk assessments completed

Competency of staff carrying out health check

Pharmacy staff undertaking measures

Health checks more likely to be performed by fully trained pharmacist

BP and AUSDRISK checks more likely to be completed by pharmacist assistants

Pharmacy staff attributes

Concerns raised regarding confidence, knowledge, skill and experience of a pharmacy assistant in carrying out RBGT

When a pharmacy assistant performed AUSDRISK, high risk patients were generally discussed with the pharmacist

Motivation

Lack of motivation by staff limited how often the diabetes risk assessment was completed

Procedure

Space

Limited number of pharmacies had a designated ‘booth’ or private consulting room to complete RBGT. General feeling that it was inappropriate to conduct RBGT test in a pharmacy setting

Set up of a pharmacy in general was more conducive to completion of the AUSDRISK assessment than a RBGT

Technique/participants

Invasive nature of finger prick as part of RBGT was a concern for some participants

Some consumers refused waist measurement as part of AUSDRISK

Safety and cost

Concerns around appropriate disposal of ‘sharps’ and ‘clinical waste’ involved in RBGT

Purchase of consumables required to undertake RBGT and for infection control measures are expensive

Referral to GP

If blood glucose level was >5.5 mmol and the consumer had recently eaten or had something sweet to drink, staff reported that the may not refer, but rather request to re-assess the participant at a later time point

If AUSDRISK score was high due to non-modifiable risk factors (eg age and gender) staff were less likely to refer