Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The final prescription check is a mandatory but time-consuming process in Dutch community pharmacies. A safer dispensing process may have made the final prescription check obsolete.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the final prescription check in Dutch community pharmacies and explore pharmacists\' attitudes towards changing this.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch community pharmacists. The online questionnaire was based on literature and previous qualitative research, piloted in three pharmacies, and took 10 min to complete. Results were analysed descriptively.
RESULTS: A total of 409 pharmacists participated. They saw the final prescription check as an important quality assurance of the dispensing process. Nevertheless, most pharmacists agreed that the final prescription check could be optimized as they thought that the time invested outweighed the benefits. Automation of the dispensing process, only checking selected high-risk prescriptions, and more in-process checks could reduce the need for an extensive final prescription check, rather than delegating the task to assistants. To implement changes, most pharmacists felt current dispensing guidelines needed to be adapted.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a widespread consensus that optimizing the final prescription check could enhance efficiency and allow more time for person-centred care. Most pharmacists expressed a preference for updated guidelines before implementing such changes.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the final prescription check in Dutch community pharmacies and explore pharmacists\' attitudes towards changing this.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch community pharmacists. The online questionnaire was based on literature and previous qualitative research, piloted in three pharmacies, and took 10 min to complete. Results were analysed descriptively.
RESULTS: A total of 409 pharmacists participated. They saw the final prescription check as an important quality assurance of the dispensing process. Nevertheless, most pharmacists agreed that the final prescription check could be optimized as they thought that the time invested outweighed the benefits. Automation of the dispensing process, only checking selected high-risk prescriptions, and more in-process checks could reduce the need for an extensive final prescription check, rather than delegating the task to assistants. To implement changes, most pharmacists felt current dispensing guidelines needed to be adapted.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a widespread consensus that optimizing the final prescription check could enhance efficiency and allow more time for person-centred care. Most pharmacists expressed a preference for updated guidelines before implementing such changes.
摘要：
背景：在荷兰社区药房中，最终处方检查是强制性但耗时的过程。更安全的分配过程可能会使最终的处方检查过时。
目的：描述荷兰社区药房的最终处方检查，并探讨药剂师对此的态度。
方法：荷兰社区药剂师的横断面调查。在线问卷是在文献和以前的定性研究的基础上，在三家药店试点，花了10分钟完成。结果进行描述性分析。
结果：共有409名药剂师参加。他们将最终处方检查视为配药过程的重要质量保证。然而，大多数药剂师认为最终处方检查可以优化，因为他们认为投入的时间超过了收益。分配过程的自动化，只检查选定的高风险处方，更多的过程中检查可以减少对广泛的最终处方检查的需要，而不是将任务委托给助手。要实施更改，大多数药剂师认为当前的配药指南需要调整。
结论：人们普遍认为，优化最终处方检查可以提高效率，并为以人为本的护理留出更多时间。在实施此类更改之前，大多数药剂师表示倾向于更新指南。
目的：描述荷兰社区药房的最终处方检查，并探讨药剂师对此的态度。
方法：荷兰社区药剂师的横断面调查。在线问卷是在文献和以前的定性研究的基础上，在三家药店试点，花了10分钟完成。结果进行描述性分析。
结果：共有409名药剂师参加。他们将最终处方检查视为配药过程的重要质量保证。然而，大多数药剂师认为最终处方检查可以优化，因为他们认为投入的时间超过了收益。分配过程的自动化，只检查选定的高风险处方，更多的过程中检查可以减少对广泛的最终处方检查的需要，而不是将任务委托给助手。要实施更改，大多数药剂师认为当前的配药指南需要调整。
结论：人们普遍认为，优化最终处方检查可以提高效率，并为以人为本的护理留出更多时间。在实施此类更改之前，大多数药剂师表示倾向于更新指南。
