Case for pharmacist administered vaccinations in Australia

Mary BUSHELL, Kwang Choon Yee, Patrick A. Ball

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Pharmacists in Portugal, New Zealand, the UK and USA are able to administer vaccines. Despite international trends, current jurisdictional regulations prevent Australian pharmacists from administering vaccines. Aim: To assess if there is a case for pharmacist administered vaccination (PAV) in Australia. Discussion: Studies and government data indicate suboptimal uptake of some vaccines in Australia. Over the past two decades, PAV services have been introduced successfully in some developed countries. Available literature revealed PAVs provided signifi cant benefi ts in these countries, such as increased vaccination uptake and subsequent decreased disease burden and associated cost benefi ts. PAVs are in line with Australian government policy and priorities. The pharmacy profession, guided by peak professional bodies, has demonstrated a willingness to embrace PAVs based on appropriate competencies and broadening health delivery options to the public. Conclusion: There is a case for PAV services in Australia. It is not possible to adopt an overseas model of PAVs in Australia without signifi cant modifi cation to its unique immunisation program, which incorporates a different funding and governance system.
Original languageEnglish
Article number4
Pages (from-to)292-296
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Pharmacy Practice and Research
Volume43
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

Pharmacists
Vaccination
Vaccines
Immunization
Cations
Immunization Programs
Health
Portugal
New Zealand
Developed Countries
Costs
Costs and Cost Analysis

Cite this

@article{11433cd66302476088a7201ea2492ac1,
title = "Case for pharmacist administered vaccinations in Australia",
abstract = "Background: Pharmacists in Portugal, New Zealand, the UK and USA are able to administer vaccines. Despite international trends, current jurisdictional regulations prevent Australian pharmacists from administering vaccines. Aim: To assess if there is a case for pharmacist administered vaccination (PAV) in Australia. Discussion: Studies and government data indicate suboptimal uptake of some vaccines in Australia. Over the past two decades, PAV services have been introduced successfully in some developed countries. Available literature revealed PAVs provided signifi cant benefi ts in these countries, such as increased vaccination uptake and subsequent decreased disease burden and associated cost benefi ts. PAVs are in line with Australian government policy and priorities. The pharmacy profession, guided by peak professional bodies, has demonstrated a willingness to embrace PAVs based on appropriate competencies and broadening health delivery options to the public. Conclusion: There is a case for PAV services in Australia. It is not possible to adopt an overseas model of PAVs in Australia without signifi cant modifi cation to its unique immunisation program, which incorporates a different funding and governance system.",
keywords = "Pharmacy, Vaccinations, Pharmacist",
author = "Mary BUSHELL and Yee, {Kwang Choon} and Ball, {Patrick A.}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1002/j.2055-2335.2013.tb00278.x",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "292--296",
journal = "Australian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy",
issn = "0310-6810",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

Case for pharmacist administered vaccinations in Australia. / BUSHELL, Mary; Yee, Kwang Choon; Ball, Patrick A.

In: Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research, Vol. 43, No. 4, 4, 2013, p. 292-296.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Case for pharmacist administered vaccinations in Australia

AU - BUSHELL, Mary

AU - Yee, Kwang Choon

AU - Ball, Patrick A.

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Background: Pharmacists in Portugal, New Zealand, the UK and USA are able to administer vaccines. Despite international trends, current jurisdictional regulations prevent Australian pharmacists from administering vaccines. Aim: To assess if there is a case for pharmacist administered vaccination (PAV) in Australia. Discussion: Studies and government data indicate suboptimal uptake of some vaccines in Australia. Over the past two decades, PAV services have been introduced successfully in some developed countries. Available literature revealed PAVs provided signifi cant benefi ts in these countries, such as increased vaccination uptake and subsequent decreased disease burden and associated cost benefi ts. PAVs are in line with Australian government policy and priorities. The pharmacy profession, guided by peak professional bodies, has demonstrated a willingness to embrace PAVs based on appropriate competencies and broadening health delivery options to the public. Conclusion: There is a case for PAV services in Australia. It is not possible to adopt an overseas model of PAVs in Australia without signifi cant modifi cation to its unique immunisation program, which incorporates a different funding and governance system.

AB - Background: Pharmacists in Portugal, New Zealand, the UK and USA are able to administer vaccines. Despite international trends, current jurisdictional regulations prevent Australian pharmacists from administering vaccines. Aim: To assess if there is a case for pharmacist administered vaccination (PAV) in Australia. Discussion: Studies and government data indicate suboptimal uptake of some vaccines in Australia. Over the past two decades, PAV services have been introduced successfully in some developed countries. Available literature revealed PAVs provided signifi cant benefi ts in these countries, such as increased vaccination uptake and subsequent decreased disease burden and associated cost benefi ts. PAVs are in line with Australian government policy and priorities. The pharmacy profession, guided by peak professional bodies, has demonstrated a willingness to embrace PAVs based on appropriate competencies and broadening health delivery options to the public. Conclusion: There is a case for PAV services in Australia. It is not possible to adopt an overseas model of PAVs in Australia without signifi cant modifi cation to its unique immunisation program, which incorporates a different funding and governance system.

KW - Pharmacy

KW - Vaccinations

KW - Pharmacist

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899025290&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/j.2055-2335.2013.tb00278.x

DO - 10.1002/j.2055-2335.2013.tb00278.x

M3 - Review article

VL - 43

SP - 292

EP - 296

JO - Australian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy

JF - Australian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy

SN - 0310-6810

IS - 4

M1 - 4

ER -