From: Comparison of two methods for assessing diabetes risk in a pharmacy setting in Australia
Theme and sub-themes | Group 1* (N = 38) | Group 2** (N = 30) | |
---|---|---|---|
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 | >5 minutes | <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 | ✓ |