The development and validation of a tool for measuring collaborative practice between community pharmacists and physicians from the perspective of the pharmacist: The Professional Collaborative Practice Tool (PCPT)
- At: PPR 2022 (2022)
- Type: Poster
- By: SáNCHEZ MOLINA, Ana Isabel (Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, University Of Granada)
- Co-author(s): Ana Isabel Sánchez-Molina, Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, University Of Granada, España
Shalom I Benrimoj
Miguel Angel Gastelurrutia
Background: Collaborative practice involves bi-directional communication and a joint decision-making process, underpinned by a mutual understanding and respect of roles and responsibilities of the professionals involved. Increased collaborative practice between pharmacists and physicians will be driven by the constant increase of patient-oriented services. There are tools in the literature that measure collaboration, validated from the perspective of the physician and later adapted for the pharmacist. However, there appears to be a lack of validated tools from the perspective of the community pharmacists.
Objective: To develop and validate a tool to measure collaborative practice between community pharmacist and physician from the perspective of the pharmacist.
Methods: The 8 stage DeVellis method was used. A literature search was undertaken to define the collaborative practice construct. The DeVellis method includes the “Generation of an item pool” and the “Establishing the measurement format” for which a seven-point Likert scale was selected. A 156 item pool was generated and and the measurement format was established, selecting a seven-point Likert scale. The item pool was reviewed by 3 experts. A 40-item questionnaire was sent to pharmacists providing medication review services (n=110) and to a random sample of pharmacists who were providing usual care (n=226). In step 7 and 8 the content validity, reliability analysis and optimization of the tool was undertaken through Exploratory Factor Analysis using the maximum likelihood method and promax rotation. Items were evaluated for inclusion based on factor loadings (> 0.5). Internal reliability was evaluated using Cronbach alpha coefficient. Confirmatory Factor Analysis was applied.
Results: The response rate was 84.8% (285/336). The initial 40-item pool was tested. The validation process produced a 14-item tool, providing a three factors structure; “Activation for Collaborative Professional Practice”, “Integration in Collaborative Professional Practice” and “Professional Acceptance of Collaborative Practice”. The structure had a Tucker-Lewis index of 0.945, a RMSR of 0.04 and a RMSEA of 0.074. The variance explained was 62%, with factor 1 explaining 27%, factor 2 - 20% and factor 3 -15%. Internal reliability was evaluated using Cronbach alpha coefficient. The Cronbach alpha for the scale was 0.94 and for each factor 0.902, 0.813 and 0.827 respectively.
Conclusions: The tool could be used to measure the basal level of collaborative practice between physicians and pharmacists from the perspective of the pharmacist and to measure the impact of increased service provision on such collaboration.