The most remarkable result of the current study was that nearly half of the pharmacists dispensed antibiotic without prescription in both scenarios (179 out of 388 cases). The findings showed that antibiotics were dispensed and could be easily purchased without a prescription in community pharmacies of Iran, especially for treatment of suspected bacterial symptoms.
The simulated patient strategy used in the current study can closely mimic what happens in the real-world situation. Therefore, the results may reliably be extrapolated to the real setting.
Similar studies were also conducted in other countries when the global attention about antibiotic resistance had been intensified (
15-
18). Despite the different rates of dispensing antibiotics without a prescription, the results were similar in these studies, suggesting irrational antibiotic use in different clinical cases in community pharmacies. It occurs even in the developed countries, as antibiotics were dispensed in about 45% of community pharmacies in Catalonia when they were evaluated by sore throat, dysuria, and acute bronchitis scenarios (
17).
Our finding revealed that the rate of antibiotic dispensing was not significantly different between the male and female pharmacists. The results of the current study did not support a previous investigation conducted by Gastelurrutia
et al. That showed that male staff were more likely to provide antibiotics without a prescription (
19).
It is interesting to note that the rate of dispensing antibiotic in the current study was affected by the pharmacist’s age. Younger pharmacists were less interested in providing antibiotics. Since the younger pharmacists graduated recently, they may be more concerned about the unintended consequences of the irrational use of antibiotics.
We found that pharmacists were less likely to dispense antibiotics in a case of dysuria compared to sore throat. This finding was not in line with the results of a study by Lior
et al., which showed the rate of antibiotic dispensing by pharmacists was higher in the dysuria scenario compared to the sore throat scenario (34.8%
vs 79.7%) (
17). Although Lior and collogues did not provide any explanation, a possible reason might be that in these cases, sore throat was considered as a sign of viral infection, and as a result, the pharmacists had a lower tendency to dispense antibiotics.
The results of the current study revealed that about half of antibiotic dispensing for sore throat and two-third of dispensing for dysuria happened in the first level of demand without any insistence. Even a higher rate of antibiotic dispensing (95%) in the absence of any patient demand, was reported in the study conducted in Saudi Arabia (
20). Moreover, our findings showed at the second level of demand, more antibiotics were dispensed in the sore throat scenario in comparison to dysuria cases. The same results were observed with less difference in the third level of the demand. On the other hand, a substantially higher rate of referral to a physician was observed in the dysuria scenario, compared to the sore throat (
p = 0.001). Finally, the results of the current study indicated less antibiotic dispensing in the dysuria scenario in parallel with further referral to a physician. These results may be explained to some extent by the complexity of underlying causes of dysuria, leading to the lower tendency of pharmacists to antibiotic dispensing and raise the rate of referral to a physician.
The findings of the present study suggest that the rate of antibiotic dispensing in the sore throat scenario was considerably affected by geographical region. Perhaps socio-economic differences were involved in its creation. The lower socio-economic level of the southern regions (
21). led to the more antibiotic dispensing and a lower rate of accepting remedies other than antibiotics in comparison with other regions.
The influence of socioeconomic status, culture, and education on the pattern of antibiotic use without a prescription has addressed in various studies (
22,
23). The result of a study conducted in Spain to evaluate the social determinants of antibiotic use revealed a strong association between lower educational levels and a higher rate of antibiotics consumption (
22). Another study was conducted by Deschepper
et al., to assess the effect of culture on the pattern of antibiotic use in a city in Belgium and a city in the Netherlands. The result of this study showed that in the Netherlands, upper respiratory symptoms were often considered as a result of the common cold or flu. However, in Belgium, these symptoms were mostly regarded as bronchitis and antibiotics were used to treat them. (
23).
In line with similar studies, Amoxicillin was the most common dispensed antibiotic when a sore throat scenario simulated (
24). Surprisingly, amoxicillin was considered as a non-prescription medicine in many cases without any referring to a physician, although for the rest of the dispensed antibiotics, referring to a physician occurred concurrently. In the case of dysuria, ciprofloxacin ranked the first among the dispensed antibiotics. Interestingly, this vital antibiotic was administered without appropriate evaluation, which leads to the overuse of antibiotics and increases the risk of microbial resistance.
In more than 90% of the cases, the estimated allocated time to each case by the pharmacist was less than 60 sec and antibiotics were dispensed without sufficient initial assessment. Patient assessment did not follow a correct pattern, so questions about the history of allergy, pregnancy status, onset of symptoms, and patient’s other medications were asked in only less than 5% of the cases. On the other hand, if the simulated patient was properly evaluated, all dysuria cases should have been referred based on the scenario. This was in contrast to the sore throat scenario in which there was no need for referring the patient to a physician and symptom alleviation could be obtained by offering non-prescription medicines. Lack of a systematic approach to the patient to ascertain the need for referral was observed in this study.
In addition, the type of the provided information for dispensed antibiotics mainly focused on dosing while parameters like the duration and directions for use, precautions, and contraindications and adverse reactions were poorly addressed. Moreover, in both scenarios, completion of the treatment course was emphasized by pharmacists in only 18% of the cases for those who received antibiotics. Similarly, Surur
et al., found that important information such as food-drug interactions, management of missed doses, and contraindications were ignored in more than 50% of the cases (
25). This can exacerbate the rising rate of antimicrobial resistance.
Pharmacists participating in the face-to-face interview in Saudi Arabia stated the ease of access to pharmacists compared to other health care provider, patients’ trust in pharmacists, the lack of strong regulatory enforcement, customer pressure, and concerns about the financial survival of the pharmacy are the most common reasons for dispensing antibiotics without prescription through the pharmacies (
26). On the other hand, suboptimal counselling practice was found in our study. Similar results were reported in the different studies. A high volume of prescriptions, time constraints, the unwillingness of the patients to receive supplementary information from the pharmacist, and not allocating fees to the patient counseling services, have been cited by pharmacists in several community pharmacists-based surveys as the deterrent in providing counseling service. (
27).
According to the results of this study, it can be claimed that pharmacists are not sufficiently aware of their vital role in reducing the rate of antibiotic resistance by limiting unnecessary uses of antibiotics. It seemed that they are desensitized to dispensing antibiotics and its correlation with increasing the rate of antibiotic resistance.
It might be possible to perform knowledge, attitude, and practice studies in future investigations to determine current pitfalls in non-prescription antibiotic dispensing by pharmacists.
The results of the current study showed that antibiotics were dispensed easily without a prescription in the community pharmacies in Tehran, capital city of Iran. Reinforcement of existing regulations regarding antibiotics dispensing by regulatory organizations seems necessary in the current situation. It seems that pharmacists need complementary educational courses to execute their crucial role in rationalization of antibiotic use.
| Scenario 1 | Goal of scenario 1 |
|---|
| The medicine was requested for simulated patient’s sister (Age: 20) who had moderate to severe sore throat for 2 days. | The goal of the scenario was to simulate a viral sore throat and pharmacists were expected to dispense OTC medicines to alleviate symptoms as there was no indication for antibiotic dispensing. |
| (score of 5 based on a 0-10 scale) |
| Associated symptoms if they were asked and the answers of the simulated patient: |
| Open-ended question: runny nose |
| Close-ended questions: |
| Cough, sneezing, itchy throat, difficulty swallowing: Yes |
| Fever, tonsillar exudates, inflation in lymphatic nodes, neck stiffness, tender anterior cervical adenopathy: No |
| Present medications and/or illness: None |
| Smoking habit: Negative |
| Any action was taken: No |
| Pregnancy: No |
| Allergy to any medicine: No |
| Scenario 2 | Goal of scenario 2 |
| The medicine was requested for the simulated patient herself (Age: 24, married) who had a burning sensation on urination (dysuria) for one day. | The goal of the scenario was to show an uncomplicated UTI requiring more investigation. Pharmacists were expected to refer the simulated patient to a physician. |
| Associated symptoms if they were asked and the answers of the simulated patient: |
| Open-ended question: frequent urination |
| Close-ended questions: |
| Vaginal discharge, urgency: Yes |
| Back pain, fever/chills, hematuria, abdominal pain, change in urine color or odor: No |
| Present medication and/or illness: None |
| History of UTI: Negative |
| Any action was taken: No |
| Pregnancy: No |
| Allergy to any medicine: No |
| Primary information | Date, scenario (sore throat/UTI) |
|---|
| Patient assessment | Who is the medicine asked for?Age, associated symptoms, duration, previous treatments/actions, any other medications, allergies, pregnancy were evaluated by the pharmacist? |
| Providing information about dispensed medication | Information about indication, doses, advices on completing the duration of treatment, adverse effects, storage condition, precautions were provided by pharmacist? |
| Result of scenario | Antibiotic dispensed? (Yes/No);If yes: in which level of demand? (First, second or third level)Which antibiotic dispensed?Did patient referred to a physician (Yes/No) |
| Pharmacist information | SexApparent age (under 30, 30 or more, not recognizable) |
| Pharmacy information | Region |
| Other information | Time of visiting pharmacy, waiting time in pharmacy, time dedicated to simulated patient, number of patients in pharmacy |
| Level of demand | Sore Throat (n = 195) | Dysuria (n = 193) | p-value |
|---|
| Level 1- Can you give me a medicine? n (%) | 50 (25.6) | 52 (26.9) | p = 0.018 |
| Level 2- Can you give me a stronger medicine? n (%) | 36 (18.4) | 14 (7.3) |
| Level 3- Can you give me an antibiotic? n (%) | 16 (8.2) | 11 (5.7) |
| Total, n (%) | 102 (52.3) | 77 (39.9) | p = 0.008 |
| Region | Sore Throat (n = 195) | Dysuria (n = 193) |
|---|
| North | 15 / 42 (35.7%) | 16 / 41 (39.0%) |
| Center | 24 / 43 (55.8%) | 14/43 (32.6%) |
| East | 20/42 (47.6%) | 17/44 (38.6%) |
| West | 22/37 (59.5%) | 16/37 (43.2%) |
| South | 21 / 29 (72.4%) | 14 / 30 (46.7%) |
| p-value | p = 0.031 | p = 0.78 |