KEY FINDINGS: Research philosophy has been introduced to offer an alternative way to think about problem-driven research that is normally conducted. To clarify the research philosophy, four research paradigms, i.e. positivism (or empiricism), postpositivism (or realism), interpretivism (or constructivism) and pragmatism, are investigated according to philosophical realms, i.e. ontology, epistemology, axiology and logic of inquiry. With the application of research philosophy, some examples of quantitative and qualitative research were elaborated along with the conventional research approach. Understanding research philosophy is crucial for pharmacy researchers and pharmacists, as it underpins the choice of methodology and data collection.

OBJECTIVES: The study aims to develop and validate scales (direct and indirect) based on a modified Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to measure factors associated with the provision of PCare for HDS users by Thai CPs.

METHOD: Item generation for the scales was based on the theoretical constructs of the modified TPB framework, literature review, and authors' previous qualitative study. Draft items were then subjected to content validity and face validity. Psychometric testing was carried out among CPs in Bangkok, Thailand. Refinement of the scales utilized factor analysis and validity was assessed using factor analysis and Rasch analysis. Internal consistency reliability and construct reliability were used to assess the scales' reliability.

RESULTS: Initially, the direct and indirect scales contained 15 and 28 items, respectively and were reduced to 12 and 16 items, after experts' review. Factor analysis further reduced the number of items of the indirect scale to 13. For both scales, confirmatory factor analysis showed model-data fit. Each construct of the direct scale was significant predictors of intention. Moreover, each construct of the direct scale correlated positively and significantly with the respective construct of the indirect scale, signifying concurrent validity. No misfit item was identified in the Rasch analysis and the majority of items were invariant across gender. Internal consistency reliability and construct reliability of the scales were acceptable.

DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study consisting of a single group before-and-after study design.

SETTING: A public emergency hospital in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

PARTICIPANTS: 660 (preintervention) and then 498 (postintervention) handwritten physician orders, medication administration records (MRAs) and pharmacy dispensing sheets of 482 and 388 patients, respectively, from emergency wards, inpatient settings and the pharmacy department were reviewed.

INTERVENTION: The intervention consisted of a series of interactive lectures delivered by an experienced clinical pharmacist to all hospital staff members and dissemination of educational tools (flash cards, printed list of HRAs, awareness posters) designed in line with the recommendations of the Institute for Safe Medical Practices and the US Food and Drug Administration. The duration of intervention was from April to May 2011.

MAIN OUTCOME: Reduction in the incidence of HRAs use from the preintervention to postintervention study period.

FINDINGS: The five most common abbreviations recorded prior to the interventions were 'IJ for injection' (28.6%), 'SC for subcutaneous' (17.4%), drug name and dose running together (9.7%), 'OD for once daily' (5.8%) and 'D/C for discharge' (4.3%). The incidence of the use of HRAs was highest in discharge prescriptions and dispensing records (72.7%) followed by prescriptions from in-patient wards (47.3%). After the intervention, the overall incidence of HRA was significantly reduced by 52% (ie, 53.6% vs 25.5%; p=0.001). In addition, there was a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of HRAs across all three settings: the pharmacy department (72.7% vs 39.3%), inpatient settings (47.3% vs 23.3%) and emergency wards (40.9% vs 10.7%).