New research published in BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health reveals that community pharmacists who provide contraceptive information to their customers say they lack the necessary resources and support to be able to provide quality counselling in this area.
366 community pharmacists were surveyed as part of the research, which aimed to understand pharmacists’ knowledge, attitudes and practises related to contraceptive counselling.
Contraceptive counselling was defined as providing tailored, in-depth discussions with patients about the range of contraceptive methods available, and as providing support to customers to help them make informed decisions in this space.
“Contraceptive counselling should involve accurate information about all available methods and ensure that medicine safety and the person’s own preferences are factored into medical decision-making,” first author and PhD candidate Pip Buckingham said.
“If poorly done, the person may be unprepared for side effects, unsure of how to use their contraceptive correctly, or miss opportunities to learn about methods most suited to their needs.
“Most of the pharmacists surveyed stated they currently discuss contraception with their patients. They felt their role in increasing access to information and decision support for contraception use was important.
“However, pharmacists felt a lack of remuneration, relevant training opportunities and professional resources were key barriers to providing contraceptive counselling in the pharmacy setting.
“Further, only 45% of pharmacies had a consultation room to improve privacy. These barriers need to be addressed for pharmacists to be able to provide quality, patient-centred care.
“Pharmacists working in areas with GP shortages were the most likely to report having advanced accreditation and a private consultation room in their pharmacy. These pharmacists could make info and advice about contraception more accessible for people living in these currently under-served communities,” she said.
For more information, visit: doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2022-201623
