Patients Express Mixed Feelings on Pharmacist Depression Screening

Patients and prescribers had differing views when interviewed about depression screening at community pharmacies, according to a study published online in the Journal of the American Pharmacists Association. 

“Prescribers were supportive of community pharmacists' ability to close the gaps in access to care for patients with mental health conditions, whereas patients had mixed feelings that may have been influenced by concerns of privacy, confidentiality, and stigma,” wrote Cortney M. Mospan, PharmD, an assistant professor at Wingate University, and colleagues.  

Study findings stemmed from interviews with 12 patients and four prescribers at a community pharmacy in Piedmont, North Carolina. Researchers conducted interviews, analyzed transcriptions, and identified interview themes. 

One theme that emerged in both patient and prescriber interviews was that mental health care provided at community pharmacies is influenced by an established relationship with the pharmacist.  

Otherwise, interviews yielded different themes. Patient perceptions focused on screenings that were private and confidential, disparate views on what interventions pharmacists could offer, and concerns related to mental health stigma, according to the study.

Meanwhile, prescriber perceptions focused on support for expanded access to depression screening at community pharmacies, the need for algorithms for care referral, and communication of full screening results, whether positive or negative.

“This deeper understanding of prescriber and patient perceptions of how community pharmacies could expand access to depression screening may provide a roadmap for offering these interventions in community pharmacies,” researchers wrote. 

—Jolynn Tumolo

Reference

Mospan CM, Gillette C, Wilson JA. Patient and prescriber perceptions of depression screening within a community pharmacy setting [published online ahead of print, 2020 Apr 9]. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2020;S1544-3191(20)30124-2. doi:10.1016/j.japh.2020.03.010