Kommunikationsproblem på Apotek

The origin of the word ‘communication’ is the Latin word communicare, meaning to make common. The reason for our communication is to share thoughts, feelings and information, we want to affect and confirm. We are used to interpersonal communication, but even if we have had a lot of practice at it during our lives, we still find our selves facing misunderstandings and conflicts. The more people we meet during a day, the greater the chance is for interruptions in the communication. In pharmacy practice, good communication is vital for the client’s health and quality of life. In recent years, there has been a change of focus in pharmacy practice, from the medication to the clients. To be able to provide care for the client and to reduce drug related problems, a good relationship has to be built between staff and client. The tool for building this relationship is good communication. The aim of this study was to observe the communication between clients and pharmacy employees. How many of the encounters involve communication problems? What is causing the communication problems? What can the pharmacist do to improve the encounter? How do pharmacists handle communication problems, and how does this affect the outcome of the encounter? The data was collected using structured observations at pharmacies using a coding scheme, defined with rules and procedures. The encounters studied were those involving a client, an employee with the title ‘Leg. Apotekare’ or ‘Leg. Receptarie’ and a conversation about prescriptions. Different kinds of communication problems or potential communication problems were identified, but more specific categorisations were needed. Two systems to identify different types of communication problems were developed. One identified different levels of communication problems, not taking in to account what or who caused them. The other system identified the communication problems caused by circumstances or the client, but not by the pharmacist. This was used to compare pharmacist behaviour in connection to the communication problems. The results show that communication problems were found in almost a third of the 343 valid observations, according to the levels of communication problem previously described. The most common potential communication problems were lack of eye contact, not expressing positivity, the client helping someone else to get their medicine and that the client’s medicine was not in store at the pharmacy. In spite of all the communication problems, 95,9 % of the clients were perceived as satisfied at the end of the encounter. What the pharmacist can do to prevent the potential communication problem from causing an actual communication problem is to reinforce positive behaviour. For example to maintain eye contact, be a good listener, act with concern for the client and be specific and clear while communicating. When comparing the pharmacists’ behaviour in problematical encounters that ended well and those who did not, the usage of positive behaviour was generally more common in the encounters that ended well. Therefore, the conclusion is, that a reduction in the number of problematical encounters could be reached by intentional use of positive reinforcement by the pharmacists.