Evaluation of Physiotherapist and Podiatrist Independent Prescribing

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Evaluation of Physiotherapist and Podiatrist Independent Prescribing

  • IRAS ID

    164735

  • Contact name

    Nicola Carey

  • Contact email

    n.carey@surrey.ac.uk

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    1 years, 4 months, 31 days

  • Research summary

    This is a two year project which aims to evaluate the practice of Physiotherapists and Podiatrists (PPs) who prescribe medicines for patients in different hospital and community based clinics in England. A case study approach will be used to compare services provided by physiotherapists and podiatrists who are qualified to prescribe (PP-IP) to those PPs who are not qualified to prescribe (NP-PP). The purpose is to determine whether there are any differences in the quality of care or in the cost of services provided by PP-IPs and NP-PPs. This will provide much needed information about any costs or benefits of employing a PP-IP and any differences in clinical practice.

    The case study will include 6 sites where a physiotherapist/ podiatrist prescriber (PP-IP) is employed and 6 comparison sites where physiotherapist / podiatrist are not prescribers (NP-PP) and prescriptions are issued by a doctor.

    Multiple methods of data collection will be used. Data will be collected from 60 patients at each site over one working week (5 days maximum). This will include observations of PP practice, audio recordings of consultations (5 per site), and an audit of information recorded in the patient records ( 15 per site) to compare the work of PP-IPs and PP-NPs. Patient questionnaires, from around 30 patients at each site, will be collected (to measure quality of life ,satisfaction with services and medicines information and views of PP-IP. Patients will be adult and child volunteers, recruited by a research nurse. Data on PP activity will be collected through the use of diaries. Interviews with PP-IP, NP-PPs and team members will find out their views of the benefits and drawbacks of PP-IP. The findings from the project will be used to inform guidance for managers and commissioners of health services to consider when PP services.

  • REC name

    London - Surrey Borders Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    14/LO/1874

  • Date of REC Opinion

    26 Nov 2014

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion