Article Sidebar
Published:
Mar 18, 2020Keywords:
Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publication rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Note: If you need to comply with your funding body policy, you can apply for the CC BY license after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
Main Article Content
Comparison of patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical services of postal pharmacy and community pharmacy
Abstract
Background: The growing drive in South Africa to contain medicine cost has seen the emergence of postal pharmacy as an alternative mechanism to dispense chronic medicines. Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical services has received limited attention in South Africa.
Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the level of patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical services between postal and community pharmacies.
Setting: The research was conducted in the eThekwini Municipality, KwaZulu- Natal Province, South Africa in July and August 2014.
Methods: A cross-sectional quantitative study using a randomised, telephonic questionnaire survey was conducted. Selected land telephone numbers were called until a sample size of 250 community pharmacy participants and 125 postal pharmacy participants was obtained.
Results: Nine hundred and five telephone calls were made to obtain a sampling frame of 375 (41.44%) respondents, 250 for community and 125 for postal. After adjusting overall satisfaction by removing financial satisfaction, there was no significant difference between satisfaction in the two groups (p = 0.471). Postal pharmacy participants reported a higher level of financial satisfaction (p = 0.001). Community pharmacy participants reported a higher level of satisfaction with counselling or explanation (p = 0.028) and less medicine wastage (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical services provided by either community or postal pharmacy was not significantly different. However, community pharmacies tend to address patients’ specific concerns more effectively. With the move to National Health Insurance, policymakers need to ensure that they provide high-quality pharmaceutical services and are more inclusive of community pharmacies to deliver quality care.
Keywords: pharmacy; postal; community; patient satisfaction; South Africa; survey.
