Beliefs about inhaled corticosteroids: Comparison of community pharmacists, pharmacy technicians and patients with asthma

Abstract

Objectives: To compare pharmacists' and pharmacy technicians' perceptions of patients' beliefs regarding inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with those of patients and to compare the ICS beliefs of pharmacists and technicians with those of patients with asthma. Methods: 1269 community pharmacies were approached to fill out an online questionnaire; 1952 patients were sent a questionnaire by post. Beliefs (i.e., necessity and concerns) regarding ICS were measured using (an adapted version of) the Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire (BMQ-specific). Pharmacists and technicians were instructed to fill out the BMQ for themselves, and to fill it out in the way they thought most of their patients would complete it. Results: 136 pharmacists, 90 pharmacy technicians and 161 patients with asthma completed the questionnaire. Pharmacists and technicians thought patients had more concerns about ICS than patients themselves reported (p < 0.0001). They also thought that patients had stronger beliefs in their personal need for ICS than patients reported (p < 0.01). Pharmacists reported lower levels of concerns than patients (p < 0.05) and both providers attributed a higher level of necessity to ICS than patients did (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Pharmacists and technicians overestimate the personal need for treatment as well as the concerns patients with asthma have regarding ICS. They also have, to some extent, stronger positive beliefs about ICS than patients. If pharmacists and technicians expect that patients share their positive views about ICS, they might be less likely to elicit and address patients' doubts and concerns about ICS, which might be relevant for effective ICS treatment and subsequent patient outcomes.

Keywords:

• Beliefs about medicines
• perceptions of patients'  beliefs
• patient-pharmacist communication
• adherence
• patient-centered communication

Acknowledgements

Data were collected with the help of the Utrecht University pharmacy practice research network (UPPER), and the work was conducted in compliance with the requirements of the UPPER institutional review board of the Department of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy (http://www.uu.nl/vkc/upper). Finally, we thank all patients, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians who participated in this study.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the article.

Funding

We would like to thank the Royal Dutch Association for the Advancement of Pharmacy (KNMP) for the financial contribution to this study.