Describing interruptions, multi-tasking and task-switching in the community pharmacy: A qualitative study in England

Background: There is growing evidence base around interruptions and distractions in the community pharmacy setting. There is also evidence to suggest these practices may be associated with dispensing errors. Up to date, qualitative research on this subject is limited. Objective: To explore interruptions and distractions in the community setting; utilising an ethnographic approach to be able to provide a detailed description of the circumstances surrounding such practices. Setting: Community pharmacies in England, July to October 2011. Method: An ethnographic approach was taken. Non participant, unstructured observations were utilised to make records of pharmacists’ every activities. Case studies were formed by combining field notes with detailed information on pharmacists and their respective pharmacy businesses. Content analysis was undertaken both manually and electronically, utilising NVivo 10. Results: Response rate was 12% (n=11). Over fifteen days, a total of 123 hours and 58 minutes of observations were recorded in 11 separate pharmacies of 11 individual pharmacists. The sample was evenly split by gender (female n=6; male n=5) and pharmacy ownership (independent n=5; multiple n=6). Employment statuses included employee pharmacists (n=6), owners (n=4) and a locum (n=1). Average period of registration as a pharmacist was 19 years (range 5-39 years). Average prescriptions busyness of pharmacies ranged from 2,600 – 24,000 items dispensed per month. Two key themes were: “Interruptions and task-switching” and “distractions and multi-tasking.” All observed pharmacists’ work was dominated by interruptions, task-switches, distractions and multi-tasking, often to manage a barrage of conflicting demands. These practices were observed to be part of a deep-rooted culture in the community setting. Directional work maps illustrated the extent and direction of task switching employed by pharmacists. Conclusions: In this study pharmacists’ working practices were permeated by interruptions and multi-tasking. These practices are inefficient and potentially reduce patient safety in terms of dispensing accuracy

Prioritisation of colonoscopy services in colorectal cancer screening programmes to minimise impact of COVID-19 pandemic on predicted cancer burden: A comparative modelling study

Objectives: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) has been disrupted in many countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Performing catch-up of missed screens while maintaining regular screening services requires additional colonoscopy capacity that may not be available. This study aimed to compare strategies that clear the screening backlog using limited colonoscopy resources. Methods: A range of strategies were simulated using four country-specific CRC natural-history models: Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA) and MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis for CRC (MISCAN-Colon) (both in the Netherlands), Policy1-Bowel (Australia) and OncoSim (Canada). Strategies assumed a 3-month screening disruption with varying recovery period lengths (6, 12, and 24 months) and varying FIT thresholds for diagnostic colonoscopy. Increasing the FIT threshold reduces the number of referrals to diagnostic colonoscopy. Outcomes for each strategy were colonoscopy demand and excess CRC-related deaths due to the disruption. Results: Performing catch-up using the regular FIT threshold in 6, 12 and 24 months could prevent most excess CRC-related deaths, but required 50%, 25% and 12.5% additional colonoscopy demand, respectively. Without exceeding usual colonoscopy demand, up to 60% of excess CRC-related deaths can be prevented by increasing the FIT threshold for 12 or 24 months. Large increases in FIT threshold could lead to additional deaths rather than preventing them. Conclusions: Clearing the screening backlog in 24 months could avert most excess CRC-related deaths due to a 3-month disruption but would require a small increase in colonoscopy demand. Increasing the FIT threshold slightly over 24 months could ease the pressure on colonoscopy resources