Abstract

Background Moral reasoning competency is essential in healthcare practice, especially in situations of moral dilemmas when a professional has to choose a morally justifiable action among several suboptimal action options. The Australian Professional Ethics in Pharmacy test (PEP test) measures moral reasoning among pharmacists. In Australia three levels of moral reasoning (schemas) were measured (1) business orientation (2) rules and regulations, and (3) patient rights (i.e. most advanced schema). Objective To test the applicability of the PEP test to pharmacists working in the Netherlands. Setting Dutch community pharmacy. Methods The PEP test consists of 36 statements (items) accompanying 3 moral dilemma scenarios. It was translated into Dutch and completed by 390 pharmacists. Principle component analysis (PCA) was used to investigate construct validity and Cronbach’s Alpha was used to indicate internal consistency of the Dutch version of the PEP test. The eligible grouped statements and perceived possible moral reasoning schemas were compared to the Australian findings. Main outcome measure Moral reasoning schemas. Results The PCA analysis resulted in 3 components (i.e. possible moral reasoning schemas) that together accounted 27% variance in the data. The statements that represented the moral reasoning schemas ‘business orientation’ and ‘rules and regulations’ were somewhat similar when comparing these with the statements that represented these schemas in the PEP test study. The most advanced moral reasoning schema identified in Dutch pharmacists contained different statements compared to the statements that represented that schema among Australian pharmacists. This schema was labelled ‘professional ethics’. Conclusion The PEP test needs further adaptation to the Dutch pharmacy practice context: especially the statements that should reflect the most advanced moral reasoning schema, need more accurate representations of professional pharmacy ethics that guide pharmacists in the Netherlands. Moral reasoning tests for a specific professional setting or country should be developed and adapted by experts who share the same professional values and practice as the respondents.

Highlights

  • Ethics approval and confidentialityCompared to other healthcare practices, like nursing and medicine, ethics receives relatively little attention in pharmacy practice [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]

  • The Principle component analysis (PCA) analysis confirmed the construct validity of the PEP-NL data

  • This study shows that the Dutch version of the Professional Ethics in Pharmacy test (PEP test) resulted in two identical moral reasoning schemas compared to the Australian version, and in one different schema, namely the post-conventional moral reasoning schema

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Compared to other healthcare practices, like nursing and medicine, ethics receives relatively little attention in pharmacy practice [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. This is surprising considering pharmacists’ worldwide recognition as experts responsible for pharmaceutical care [2, 8]. Pharmacists experience moral dilemmas in their patient-focussed roles [1, 4, 5, 7, 9,10,11].

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call