Results of a cross-sectional survey of Community Pharmacists’ attitudes to the introduction of 60-day dispensing of selected Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prescription items in Australia.

Abstract

Background: A 60-day dispensing policy modification to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (60-DDPBS) was announced unexpectedly by the Australian Government in April 2023. This has provided prescribers with an option of selecting a 60-day rather than 30-day supply of up to 320 medicines available on the scheme without changed remuneration to community pharmacies. Objectives: To evaluate the economic and professional impacts of the 60-DDPBS on community pharmacies in Western Australia (WA). Methods: A questionnaire which utilized a combination of Likert scale questions and open-ended questions to capture quantitative and qualitative data was mailed to a random sample of 250 community pharmacies in WA. Returned questionnaires were coded in an Excel spread sheet and analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative responses were thematically analysed. Results: Responses were from 76 (30.4%) recipients. Most were male (48/76, 63.2%) and 35/75 (46.7%) sole proprietors. There were 15/74 (20.3%) pharmacies located >10 km from another pharmacy. There were 41/74 (55.4%) that expected their profit to decrease by ≥ 21%, and there were 35/74 (47.3%) who expected this profit decrease as well as a decrease in pharmacy or non-pharmacy staff. Four themes emerged from the free-hand responses provided by respondents. Two described the views respondents expressed regarding the approach taken by the government for its implementation (“government distrust following the shock decision” and “consequences of 60 day dispensing”). The other two themes related to more direct “economic responses” regarding future viability of their community pharmacy and “future outlook” of community pharmacy in Australia. Many respondents indicated significant financial stress, potential closures, and pharmacist and non-pharmacist staff losses from the profession as a result from 60-DDPBS. In addition the mental health of many professionals is under stress. The public neediest of pharmacy services have received no benefit. The disrespect shown for pharmacy as a profession and the immediate and longterm economic impacts are stressful for pharmacists. Conclusion: Severe financial stress, causing charging for services previously often provided for free and the expectation that many pharmacists will leave the profession are the economic and professional implications resulting from 60-DDPBS. Policy makers and professional bodies should mitigate these findings.