Volume 13, Issue 3 (9-2025)
jmsthums 2025, 13(3): 37-48 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mojahedian M M, Ghaeini Hesarouieh M, Ahmadi Teymourlouy A, Khalaji M. Design and evaluation of a native tool to measure Good Pharmacy Performance (GPP). jmsthums 2025; 13 (3) :37-48
URL: http://jms.thums.ac.ir/article-1-1393-en.html
URL: http://jms.thums.ac.ir/article-1-1393-en.html
Mohammad Mahdi Mojahedian1 
, Masoud Ghaeini Hesarouieh2 , Ahmad Ahmadi Teymourlouy3 , Mahla Khalaji2
, Masoud Ghaeini Hesarouieh2 , Ahmad Ahmadi Teymourlouy3 , Mahla Khalaji2
1- Department of Clinical pharmacy and Pharmacoeconomics, School of Pharmacy, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- School of Pharmacy, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of Healthcare Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- School of Pharmacy, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of Healthcare Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (24 Views)
Background & Aim: Good Pharmacy Performance (GPP) is a basic criterion for the quality of pharmaceutical services in a society. However, its routine assessment is limited in Iran. The aim of this study was to evaluate the good performance of pharmacies and to compare its advantages among pharmacies affiliated with Iran University of Medical Sciences using a locally designed instrument based on standards developed by the International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) and the World Health Organization (WHO) for evaluating good pharmacy practice.
Methods: In this research, a native tool for measuring good pharmacy performance was first developed. Indicators were extracted through a review of books and official documents from FIP and WHO. After expert consultation in five areas—distribution and rational use of medicines, counseling and prescription services, process management and documentation and information technology, physical structure and storage of medicines, and pharmacists’ services—121 items were developed. Then, 20 outpatient pharmacies affiliated with Iran University of Medical Sciences were studied in a cross-sectional design. Data were collected using a researcher-prepared checklist, completed through face-to-face interviews with pharmacy staff and direct observations by the researchers.
Results: The highest scores were related to the index of process management, documentation, and information technology (7.92 ± 1.82) and the physical structure, warehousing, and storage of medicines (7.87 ± 1.34). The lowest score was related to counseling and prescription services (5.56 ± 3.21). The overall mean score across the five indices was 6.71 out of 10.
Conclusion: The developed native tool enables the evaluation of GPP standards in Iranian pharmacies at the national level. The results, consistent with international findings, indicate that pharmacies require structural, educational, and regulatory reforms so that the pharmacist’s role in promoting public health becomes more prominent and the quality of pharmaceutical services reaches a more desirable level.
Methods: In this research, a native tool for measuring good pharmacy performance was first developed. Indicators were extracted through a review of books and official documents from FIP and WHO. After expert consultation in five areas—distribution and rational use of medicines, counseling and prescription services, process management and documentation and information technology, physical structure and storage of medicines, and pharmacists’ services—121 items were developed. Then, 20 outpatient pharmacies affiliated with Iran University of Medical Sciences were studied in a cross-sectional design. Data were collected using a researcher-prepared checklist, completed through face-to-face interviews with pharmacy staff and direct observations by the researchers.
Results: The highest scores were related to the index of process management, documentation, and information technology (7.92 ± 1.82) and the physical structure, warehousing, and storage of medicines (7.87 ± 1.34). The lowest score was related to counseling and prescription services (5.56 ± 3.21). The overall mean score across the five indices was 6.71 out of 10.
Conclusion: The developed native tool enables the evaluation of GPP standards in Iranian pharmacies at the national level. The results, consistent with international findings, indicate that pharmacies require structural, educational, and regulatory reforms so that the pharmacist’s role in promoting public health becomes more prominent and the quality of pharmaceutical services reaches a more desirable level.
Keywords: Pharmaceutical services, Quality indicators of healthcare, Good pharmacy Performance, Tool developmen
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2025/01/19 | Accepted: 2025/05/18 | Published: 2025/11/17
Received: 2025/01/19 | Accepted: 2025/05/18 | Published: 2025/11/17
References
1. Goel P, R.-D.D., Berman P, Soumerai S., Retail pharmacies in developing countries: a behavior and intervention framework. Social science & medicine., 1996 Apr. 42(8): p. 1155-61. [DOI:10.1016/0277-9536(95)00388-6]
2. Szeinbach S, S.-V.E., Parekh A, Herderick M., Dispensing errors in community pharmacy: perceived influence of sociotechnical factors. International Journal for Quality in Health Care., 2007. 19(3): p. 203-9. [DOI:10.1093/intqhc/mzm018]
3. Alkhawajah AM, E.A., he role of pharmacists in patients' education on medication. Public Health., 1992. 106(3): p. 231-7. [DOI:10.1016/S0033-3506(05)80541-4]
4. Liu CP, Z.M., Sun JX, He J, Gao Y, Qin FX., miR-146a reduces depressive behavior by inhibiting microglial activation. Mol Med Rep., 2021. 23(6): p. 1-11. [DOI:10.3892/mmr.2021.12102]
5. Erah PO, N.J., Identification of standards for pharmaceutical care in Benin City. Tropical Journal of Pharmaceutical Research., 2002. 1(2): p. 55-66. [DOI:10.4314/tjpr.v1i2.14585]
6. Bou-Saba A, K.K., Salameh P., The current trends and challenges towards good community pharmacy practice and the way forward. Exploratory Research in Clinical and Social Pharmacy., 2022 Jun 1. [DOI:10.1016/j.rcsop.2022.100152]
7. Sacre H, O.S., Choueiry G, Hobeika E, Farah R, Hajj A, Akel M, Hallit S, Salameh P., Factors associated with quality of life among community pharmacists in Lebanon: results of a cross-sectional study. Pharmacy Practice (Granada). 2019 Dec. 17. [DOI:10.18549/PharmPract.2019.4.1613]
8. Adepu R, N.B., General practitioner's perceptions about the extended1 roles of the community pharmacist in the state of Karnataka. Indian J Pharm Sci., 2006. 68(1): p. 36-40. [DOI:10.4103/0250-474X.22961]
9. Poudel A, K.S., Alam K, Palaian S., erception of Nepalese community pharmacists towards patient counseling and continuing pharmacy education program: a multicentric study. J Clin Diagn Res., 2009. 3: p. 1408-13.
10. Tiyyagura SR, P.A., Rathinavelu MR., Assessment of good pharmacy practice (GPP) in pharmacies of community settings in India. IOSR J Pharm., 2014. 4(12): p. 27-33.
11. Wijesinghe PR, J.R., Seneviratne RD., An assessment of the compliance with good pharmacy practice in an urban and rural district in Sri Lanka. Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety., 2007 Feb. 16(2): p. 197-206. [DOI:10.1002/pds.1277]
12. Yegenoglu S, O.G., Counseling of pharmacists to community on issues other than drug purchasing and drug related information: a survey in Ankara. Turkish J Pharm Sci., 2005. 2(2): p. 83-91.
13. Fogarty TL, B.A., Burton S., Different models of pharmaceutical services and care in primary healthcare clinics in the Eastern Cape, South Africa: Challenges and opportunities for pharmacy practice. African Journal of Primary Health Care and Family M.
14. Shrestha R, G.A., Study of good pharmacy practice in community pharmacy of three districts of Kathmandu valley, Nepal. Int J Sci Rep., 2018 Oct 4. 4(10): p. 240-5. [DOI:10.18203/issn.2454-2156.IntJSciRep20184191]
15. Badro DA, S.H., Hallit S, Amhaz A, Salameh P., Good pharmacy practice assessment among community pharmacies in Lebanon. Pharmacy Practice (Granada). 2020 Mar. 18. [DOI:10.18549/PharmPract.2020.1.1745]
16. Javadi MR, E.K., Mirbolooki MR, et al., Pharmacy practice in Iran. Archives of Iranian
17. Medicine., 2013. 16(10): p. 574-579. [DOI:10.1089/jpm.2013.9510]
18. Quintana-Barcena, P., C. Sinner, and J.J.I.J.o.P.P. Berger, Domiciliary medication review (ReMeDo): development, reliability and acceptability of a tool for community pharmacists. 2022. 30(2): p. 129-135. [DOI:10.1093/ijpp/riab078]
19. Adeoye-Olatunde, O.A., et al., Adaptation and validation of the patient assessment of chronic illness care in United States community pharmacies. 2022. 22(1): p. 355. [DOI:10.1186/s12913-022-07697-w]
20. Schönenberger, N., C. Meyer-Massetti, and S.J.E.j.o.h.p. Bravo, Development of a quality assessment tool for pharmacy and therapeutics committees and subsequent pilot testing. 2022. [DOI:10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003365]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb