Cited by 38Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentPharmacy and Medical PracticesSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Pharmacists Who Screen and Discuss Opioid Misuse With Patients: Future Directions for Research and Practice

Cochran, Gerald, Field, Craig, Lawson, Kenneth·2015·Journal of Pharmacy Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid (PO) abuse has reached epidemic proportions in the United States, and pharmacies are locations from which these medications are often diverted. This study identifies factors associated with pharmacists who currently screen and discuss PO misuse with patients. METHODS: A secondary data analysis of a cross-sectional Web-based survey that was sent to pharmacists was conducted. The survey contained items that assessed whether pharmacists currently screened and discussed PO misuse with patients along with pharmacists' attitudes and beliefs toward providing brief interventions. Multivariable models were developed which identified factors associated with pharmacists' currently screening and discussing misuse. RESULTS: Chain setting pharmacists (odds ratio [OR] = 6.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16-32.72) and pharmacists interested in being directly involved in PO screening and brief intervention research projects (OR = 2.06, 95% CI = 1.35-3.15) were most likely to report current screening. Pharmacists who reported currently screening for misuse (OR = 4.27, 95% CI = 2.83-6.45) and who reported wanting to help patients who misuse POs (OR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.50-6.15) were most likely to currently discuss abuse. CONCLUSIONS: Investigators implementing pharmacy-based screening and brief intervention studies for POs should take into account practice location and pharmacists' interest in addressing PO issues.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0897190014522064

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cochran, G., Field, C., & Lawson, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Cochran, Gerald
Venue
Journal of Pharmacy Practice
Published
2014-02-13
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
404-412
ISSN
  • 0897-1900 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-1937
OpenAlex
W2167616852
Cited by
38
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmacy Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
prescription opioid misuse, opioid screening, screening and brief intervention, pharmacist attitudes, community pharmacy, pharmacy chains, pharmacy-based intervention, opioid abuse
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Attitude of Health Personnel, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Opioid-Related Disorders, Pharmaceutical Services, Pharmacists, United States, Multivariate Analysis, Health Care Surveys, Professional Role, Prescription Drug Misuse

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review