Professional practice following regulatory change: An evaluation using principles of “Better Regulation”

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLynch, Matthew-
dc.contributor.authorKodate, Naonori-
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-29T06:45:16Z-
dc.date.available2021-04-29T06:45:16Z-
dc.date.copyright2019 Elsevieren_US
dc.date.issued2020-02-
dc.identifier.citationResearch in Social and Administrative Pharmacyen_US
dc.identifier.issn1551-7411-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10197/12131-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The provisions in place internationally to regulate the practice of healthcare professionals have undergone significant change. However, this changing regulatory environment as experienced by healthcare professionals in the practice setting has not to date been widely researched. Objective: To describe the “lived experience” of pharmacists in community practice in Ireland of the model of regulation introduced by the Pharmacy Act 2007 and their perception of it as fulfilling the seven principles of “better regulation”: Necessity; Effectiveness/Targeted; Proportionality; Transparency; Accountability; Consistency and Agility. Method: 20 community pharmacists purposively selected, shared their lived experiences of the Act, as implemented in a semi-structured interview. A qualitative content analysis incorporating a framework analysis based on the seven principles of better regulation was used to analyze the data. Results: The Act and its implementation by the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland (PSI) was not perceived by community pharmacists overall as fulfilling the principles of better regulation. While there was agreement that the Act was necessary, its implementation by the PSI was not viewed as being effective, targeted, proportional and consistent. The PSI was considered to act as a deterrence regulator that is not adequately transparent or accountable. The Act is not sufficiently agile to respond to changes in pharmacy practice. Conclusion: Community pharmacists acknowledge the need for the Pharmacy Act but perceive that the PSI needs to adopt a more responsive approach to implementation if the Act is to be considered a model of better regulation. The study findings are of interest as there is little published research on how regulation is experienced by healthcare professionals who are subject to its provisions. The principles of better regulation provide an effective qualitative methodology to examine models of professional regulation based on the “lived experience” of regulatees.en_US
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsThis is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy (16, 2, (2020)) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2019.05.007en_US
dc.subjectHealthcare professionalen_US
dc.subjectCommunity pharmacisten_US
dc.subjectImplementationen_US
dc.subjectLived experienceen_US
dc.subjectPharmacy lawen_US
dc.subjectRegulationen_US
dc.subjectRisk-based regulationen_US
dc.titleProfessional practice following regulatory change: An evaluation using principles of “Better Regulation”en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.internal.authorcontactothernaonori.kodate@ucd.ieen_US
dc.statusPeer revieweden_US
dc.identifier.volume16en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage208en_US
dc.identifier.endpage215en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.sapharm.2019.05.007-
dc.neeo.contributorLynch|Matthew|aut|-
dc.neeo.contributorKodate|Naonori|aut|-
dc.date.updated2020-06-17T22:35:10Z-
dc.rights.licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ie/en_US
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextopen-
Appears in Collections:Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice Research Collection
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
PostAcceptance_Manuscript_Lynch&Kodate_2019.pdf478.9 kBAdobe PDFDownload
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

124
checked on May 10, 2021

Download(s)

5
checked on May 10, 2021

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


If you are a publisher or author and have copyright concerns for any item, please email research.repository@ucd.ie and the item will be withdrawn immediately. The author or person responsible for depositing the article will be contacted within one business day.