Skip to main content

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

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  
  1. AUSDRISK: Australian type 2 diabetes risk assessment: BP: Blood pressure; RBGT: Random blood glucose testing; *BP/AUSDRISK/RBGT; ** BP/AUSDRISK.