Pets Are Family Too! Pharmacy Provided Pet Meds and Services
Pharm Pract (Granada). 2018 Jul-Sep; 16(3): 1224.
Assessing pet possessor and veterinary perceptions of need for veterinarian compounding services in a customs chemist's shop setting
Shelby A. Bennett
Clinical Staff Pharmacist. Cherokee Main Street Pharmacy. Cherokee, IA (U.s.). [At the time study was conducted: PGY1 Community-Based Chemist's Resident. Balls Food Stores – Price Chopper Chemist's. Overland Park, KS. (United States).] moc.liamg@58795BAS
Janelle F. Ruisinger
Clinical Professor. Schoolhouse of Pharmacy, University of Kansas. Kansas City, KS (United States). ude.cmuk@regnisiurj
Katelyn Grand. Steele
Clinical Chemist. Landmark Health. Overland Park, KS (United States). [At the time study was conducted: Pharmacist-in-Charge. Balls Nutrient Stores - Price Chopper Pharmacy. Overland Park, KS (United States). moc.sdoofsllab@eleets.nyletak
Brittany L. Melton
Banana Professor. School of Pharmacy, University of Kansas. Kansas Urban center, KS (U.s.a.). ude.cmuk@2notlemb
Received 2018 Mar ane; Accepted 2018 Jul 21.
- Supplementary Materials
-
online Appendix ane.
GUID: B0F8B585-A22B-4CFC-B598-4BFCDAB74211
online Appendix ii.
GUID: 437A575E-41EF-4FCD-8D8C-66FE048B8CE3
Abstract
Background:
Pets, pet owners (referred to as clients in veterinarian medicine and throughout this article), veterinarians, and community pharmacies may all benefit from veterinary compounding services provided in community pharmacies, but the benefits of this service are not well-documented in the literature.
Objectives:
This study identified perceived benefits and barriers and evaluated the demand for veterinarian compounding services in community pharmacies; it also evaluated current business practices related to veterinary compounding services.
Methods:
A cantankerous-sectional survey was administered to three groups: ane) clients who filled a pet prescription at a study pharmacy, 2) clients who had non filled pet prescriptions, and iii) local veterinarians. Eligible participants were 18 or older; clients must accept owned a pet in the by v years. The surveys collected demographic data and assessed benefits, barriers, need, and business concern practices regarding veterinary compounding services. Demographics were evaluated through descriptive statistics. Responses to Likert-scale items were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test. Qualitative responses were assessed for emerging themes.
Results:
One hundred xviii clients and 15 veterinarians participated in the report. Seventy-two of 116 clients (62%) and eight of 10 veterinarians (80%) agreed that clients would benefit from veterinarian compounds provided in community pharmacies. Only xl% of veterinarians agreed that customs pharmacists have the knowledge to compound pet medications, compared to 67% of clients (P=0.010). Similarly, 47% of veterinarians agreed that community pharmacists have the skills to compound pet medications, compared to 72% of clients (P=0.016). Xl-eight of 118 clients (41%) would travel 10 miles or more out of their way for veterinarian compounding services at customs pharmacies.
Conclusions:
This written report assessed client and veterinarian perceptions of veterinarian compounding service benefits, barriers, and need in community pharmacies. Clients identified more opportunities for veterinary compounding services in community pharmacies when compared to veterinarians. Both groups identified a need for veterinary compounding services and agreed community pharmacies providing these services would benefit pets and clients.
Keywords: Drug Compounding, Pets, Community Chemist's shop Services, Pharmacies, Pharmacists, Veterinarians, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Surveys and Questionnaires, Kansas
INTRODUCTION
Sixty-viii percent of American households are estimated to take at least one pet, with 63% of clients because their pets to be members of the family.1 In 2016, the American Pet Products Association (APPA) reported that clients in the Us spent about USD 16 billion on veterinary intendance, including routine veterinary visits and prescription medications.2 With recent advances in medicine, pets are living longer, just like their human counterparts. A longer life expectancy means more than animals develop chronic diseases, which tin be costly to manage.three,4 In 2015, the average amount of money spent on veterinary intendance per pet in the United States was nearly USD ane,300.2
Pets develop many of the aforementioned chronic diseases as humans, including hypothyroidism, arthritis, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.3-five Veterinary medications play a significant role in the management of these diseases, yet one study showed more than one-third of clients find administering medications to their pet to be challenging.v Pets injuring their owners at the time of administration, avoiding medications due to lack of palatability, and refusing to eat tablets or capsules are all barriers to effective medication adherence.6
Community pharmacists are uniquely positioned to assistance clients find solutions to medication issues and to collaborate with local veterinarians to provide the best care for their mutual patients.7 Prescription filling trends show that clients increasingly seek to fill their pet's medications at community pharmacies.8 In many cases, pets are prescribed generic man medications which are available at low cost from customs pharmacies. In addition, some veterinary medications tin can be compounded by a pharmacist into a dosage form that is more clinically appropriate for both pet and client than commercially available products. Pharmacies that specialize in compounding regularly serve pets and their owners, but most customs pharmacies practice not currently offer this service. Additionally, customs pharmacies ofttimes offer more convenient locations and hours of performance than compounding pharmacies and veterinary practices. Therefore, customs pharmacies offer veterinary compounding services could offer low price medications, solutions to medication administration challenges, and convenient hours and locations to clients.1,ii Veterinarians could benefit through decreased drug inventory costs by outsourcing medication dispensing to a community chemist's.nine Veterinarians may also benefit past partnering with a community chemist's to address therapeutic gaps and overcome drug shortages for their mutual patients.eight,ten Thus, all parties involved may benefit from customs pharmacies providing veterinary compounding services, but the benefits of this service are non well documented in the literature.
Despite these possible benefits, working relationships between pharmacists and veterinarians may exist less established than pharmacists' professional relationships with other prescribers.8 Every bit more than clients fill pet prescriptions, including compounds, at community pharmacies, the puddle of patients existence mutually cared for by veterinarians and pharmacists grows.7,viii Equally clinical practice evolves, education for pharmacy professionals must adapt to continue providing the best possible care for these patients. Increased admission to veterinarian resource and instruction may help subtract pharmacist errors when preparing veterinary prescriptions and aid in the removal of this bulwark to effective customs chemist-veterinarian collaboration.seven,8,eleven-13
The purpose of this study was to identify perceived benefits, barriers, and demand for veterinary compounding services in customs pharmacies and to evaluate electric current veterinarian business organisation practices regarding veterinarian compounding services.
METHODS
Written report Setting
Written report pharmacies included iii Balls Food Stores Pharmacies; Balls Food Stores is a supermarket concatenation operating 27 supermarkets with 21 pharmacies in the Kansas Metropolis metropolitan surface area. Balls Food Stores Pharmacies offer compounding services, but currently fill very few veterinarian compounds; thus, it is an surface area for possible business organization expansion.
Study Blueprint
Two cross-sectional surveys were distributed in person, via post, or via e-mail to eligible participants. Clients and veterinarians were analyzed separately. The project was granted exemption by the University of Kansas Medical Middle Human being Subjects Commission prior to starting time of the study.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Participants were eligible if they were 18 years of age or older. Clients were eligible if they had owned a pet at any time between January 1, 2012 and February 28, 2017. 2 groups of clients were targeted: those who filled a prescription for a pet at a study pharmacy betwixt January ane, 2012 and February 28, 2017 and those who had never filled a prescription for a pet at a study pharmacy. Pharmacy staff designated whatever type of animal as a pet when adding them to the dispensing system, while a costless-response detail on their survey allowed clients open up interpretation of the term "pet". All practicing veterinarians in the Kansas Metropolis metropolitan surface area were besides eligible. Clients were excluded if the contact data on their pet's prescription in the pharmacy system was inaccurate and they could not be reached for survey distribution.
Survey Tools
2 dissever but similar surveys were developed, 1 for clients and one for veterinarians. The surveys both collected demographic data in addition to assessing perceived benefits, barriers, and need for veterinary compounding services through multiple-selection, free-response, and 5-indicate Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree) survey items. The veterinary survey also assessed current business practices regarding veterinarian compounding services. The customer survey independent 26 items (
online Appendix 1
), while the veterinarian survey independent 28 items (
online Appendix two
). Pet owners are referred to equally "clients" throughout this article to follow current veterinary medical terminology. Both surveys were airplane pilot tested by five people prior to distribution.
Recruitment
Signs were posted at the study pharmacies to encourage clients to self-identify and participate in the survey. Prescription fill history through myDataMart® (Columbia, Medico), a data analysis tool, was too used to identify prescriptions filled for pets at the study pharmacies. Chemist's dispensing software allows designation of a patient as a pet; these reports included all prescriptions, whether compounded or commercially available prescriptions, and were used to mail surveys to identified clients. In addition, in-person surveys were given to clients at study pharmacies. Surveys were distributed via mail and email to veterinarians.
The Yellow Pages™ (Glendale, CA) was the primary source used to identify surface area veterinarians for the survey. Investigators also reached out to three local veterinary medical associations to recruit veterinarians to participate in the survey; investigators did not receive confirmation from any of these associations that the survey link had been distributed. Additional surveys were distributed to veterinarians via postal service and e-mail at their practice sites by the master investigator to encourage increased participation.
For all participants, a embrace letter was provided containing information well-nigh the survey and instructions for survey completion. Hard copy surveys were distributed with pre-numbered envelopes and cover letters; participants were instructed to return the survey to the pharmacy or main investigator in the sealed, numbered envelope. Participants identified in-person were encouraged to consummate the survey onsite, just take-dwelling house surveys were allowed on a case-by-case basis. Upon receipt of a sealed envelope, chemist's staff awarded a USD five incentive to the participant. Veterinarians also received a link to an electronic survey created using Qualtrics® (Provo, UT). Veterinarians who completed the electronic survey had the opportunity to enter their contact information into a second survey and then that a USD 5 incentive could exist mailed to them.
Statistical Assay
Veterinarians and clients were analyzed every bit separate subgroups. To fairly power the study and obtain statistical significance, 105 client surveys and sixty veterinary surveys needed to be completed. Participant demographics were evaluated through descriptive statistics. Responses to survey items utilizing five-point Likert scale and multiple-choice formats were compared between groups using Mann-Whitney U with an a-priori alpha value of 0.05. SPSS v.22 (Armonk, NY) was used for quantitative assay. Qualitative responses to open-ended survey items were assessed for emerging themes.
RESULTS
One hundred xviii clients and 15 veterinarians participated in the study (Figure i). Incomplete surveys were included in data assay (nine client surveys and five veterinarian surveys). The most mutual section not completed by survey respondents was the demographics section.
Survey Distribution and Completion.
*Full number of surveys distributed using this method was non measured.
The majority of survey respondents in the customer and veterinarian groups were female, 75% and 86% respectively (Tabular array one). Additionally, the overwhelming majority of survey respondents identified themselves as beingness white [98 of 109 (xc%) clients, 13 of 14 (93%) veterinarians]. Historic period was more evenly distributed between groups. Client didactics and income demographics were also evenly distributed. Veterinary education and annual household income were not assessed as these were non likely to contribute meaningful information to the study.
Table 1
Survey Respondent Demographics
| Client n (%) | Veterinarian northward (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | n=114 | n=xiv |
| Female | 86 (75.four) | 12 (85.7) |
| Age (years) | n=112 | north=14 |
| 18-29 | nine (8.0) | 0 (0) |
| 30-39 | 16 (14.iii) | 5 (35.7) |
| forty-49 | 13 (11.vi) | 2 (14.3) |
| 50-59 | 34 (30.four) | four (28.vi) |
| 60-69 | 30 (26.8) | 3 (21.four) |
| >lxx | 10 (eight.nine) | 0 (0) |
| Race/Ethnicity | n=109 | n=14 |
| White | 98 (89.9) | 13 (92.9) |
| Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino | vii (vi.four) | 0 (0) |
| More than than ane race | 2 (ane.eight) | 1 (7.1) |
| Blackness or African American | 2 (i.8) | 0 (0) |
| Educational activity | n=101 | |
| Loftier School/GED | xv (xiv.ix) | |
| Some College | 26 (25.7) | |
| Undergraduate Degree | 29 (28.7) | |
| > Master'south Degree | 31 (30.7) | |
| Annual Household Income | n=84 | |
| < USD25k | ix (10.7) | |
| USD25k - USD49k | 18 (21.iv) | |
| USD50k - USD74k | 15 (17.9) | |
| USD75k - USD100k | 15 (17.9) | |
| USD100k - USD125k | ten (11.9) | |
| USD125k - USD150k | 8 (ix.5) | |
| > USD150k | ix (10.7) |
Customer and veterinarian responses to Likert-scale survey items were compared (Effigy 2). While all comparisons seemed to bear witness a difference between the two groups, only two of these comparisons reached statistical significance. Seventy-eight of 116 (67%) customer respondents agreed or strongly agreed that customs pharmacists have the knowledge to compound medications for pets, compared to only six of 15 (xl%) veterinary respondents (p=0.010). Lxxx-3 of 116 (72%) customer respondents agreed or strongly agreed that community pharmacists have the skills to chemical compound medications for pets, while merely seven of 15 (47%) veterinary respondents shared the aforementioned view (p=0.016).
Comparing of Client and Veterinarian Responses. Compares responses to the same Likert-calibration survey items. *denotes statistical significance (P<0.05).
In improver to the results noted above, three of 15 (20%) veterinarian respondents currently perform compounding at their do. Ten of 15 (67%) veterinary respondents would prescribe more compounds if they had a trusted compounding resources. Farther, 35 of 89 (39%) clients whose pets had previously taken medications indicated it was "difficult" or "extremely difficult" to administrate medications to their pets. Pet refusal to eat or consume medication was the most commonly reported barrier to giving pets medications. This was reported by 46 of xc (51%) of clients whose pets took medications and past fourteen of xv (93%) veterinarians. Twoscore-8 of 118 (41%) client respondents reported they would travel 10 miles or more out of their manner to pick up compounded medications for their pets.
Client and veterinarian comments left in the last free-response survey particular were assessed for emerging themes (Table 2, Table 3). The item invited participants to write whatsoever additional comments they wanted to share. Some themes from clients included: clients believe veterinary compounding services would be beneficial and the decision whether or not to utilize the service would be impacted by cost and convenience. Twelve of 30 (40%) customer comments that were left did not fit into a theme; some examples included personal experiences with pet medications, while others were not relevant to study objectives. 2 of seven veterinarian comments (27%) did not fit into a theme; one provided clarification on the manner a veterinarian chose to answer to a previous item, while another discussed some specific medications that they compound in their practice.
Table 2
Emerging Themes From Client Comments (n=xxx)
| Theme | n (%) |
|---|---|
| This service would exist beneficial | half dozen (20) |
| My pet's medications come from the vet'south office | 5 (16.7) |
| Cost would exist a gene in my conclusion to utilize this service | 4 (xiii.3) |
| Convenience would exist a factor in my decision to apply this service | 3 (ten) |
| Other | 12 (40) |
Tabular array iii
Emerging themes from veterinary comments (north=7)
| Theme | north (%) |
|---|---|
| Community pharmacists lack knowledge of veterinary medications without additional education | three (42.8) |
| Our veterinarian role uses another pharmacy for our compounding needs | 2 (28.vi) |
| Other | ii (28.6) |
DISCUSSION
The torso of bear witness apropos veterinary compounding services in community pharmacies is limited. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first report to evaluate benefits, barriers, need, and business organisation practices regarding veterinary compounding services in the community pharmacy setting. This written report showed that the majority of both clients (72 of 116 [62%]) and veterinarians (8 of 10 [fourscore%]) surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that clients would benefit from community pharmacy veterinary compounding services. This may be correlated to the finding that nigh 40% of clients with experience administering medications to pets felt it was difficult. This was congruent with Reynolds and colleagues, who demonstrated that medication administration to pets was difficult for over i-third of clients (75 of 221), with nearly 10% (20 of 221) of clients rating information technology extremely hard.5 Veterinary compounding services have the potential to alleviate these administration challenges by providing flavored medications that pets are more likely to accept or medication dosage forms that are easier for clients to administrate. However, the current study showed many veterinarians (12 of 15, 80%) exercise not provide veterinarian compounding services. In this report, veterinarians (10 of 15, 67%) indicated they would prescribe more compounds if they had a trusted compounding resource, representing an opportunity for veterinarians and community pharmacists to work together to optimize patient care.
This study also showed there is a perceived need for veterinary compounding services in the urban surface area studied, as many clients (48 of 118, 41%) would travel out of their fashion for the service. In comparison, Yen found that adults in urban areas were willing to travel an average of 17.half-dozen miles to receive routine wellness care for themselves.xiv While clients may exist willing to travel fewer miles for healthcare services for their pets than for themselves, the willingness observed by respondents in the current study to travel 10 miles or more than out of their way indicates the service is still valuable to the client.
Clients (78 of 116, 67%) were more than likely than veterinarians (6 of 15, twoscore%) to agree or strongly hold that community pharmacists have the knowledge to compound pet medications. Similarly, 83 of 116 clients (72%) agreed or strongly agreed that community pharmacists have the skills to compound pet medications, while seven of fifteen (47%) veterinarian respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the same statement. These results indicate an opportunity for pharmacists to ameliorate brainwash veterinarians about their technical compounding abilities, training, and drug information skills. Congruently, a 2014 National Clan of Boards of Pharmacy (NABP) resolution states that all pharmacists dispensing veterinarian medications should take access to drug information resources and possess competence in caring for veterinarian patients.13 Accordingly, resources such as the Merck Veterinary Manual, Plumb's Veterinary Drug Handbook, and the International Veterinary Information Service (IVIS) are readily available to pharmacists, including those practicing in community pharmacies.15-17 Every bit discussed by Theberge and Sehgal, incorporating veterinary pharmacotherapy and veterinary drug information resources into chemist's shop school curricula will meliorate prepare the next generation of pharmacists to care for veterinary patients.8 Practicing pharmacists may besides go Board Certified in Veterinary Chemist's; complete veterinary residencies, rotations, and compounding boot camps; and focus their continuing education on veterinary pharmacy. They may also actively participate in professional person organizations such as the American College of Veterinary Pharmacists and the International Academy of Compounding Pharmacists. At the current fourth dimension, chemist's education lone does not brand a pharmacist competent in veterinary pharmacology. Pharmacists serving veterinary patients have a duty to seek out these additional resources and opportunities to provide the best patient care. Increasing community pharmacist access to these resource tin meliorate veterinary patient safety; veterinarian knowledge of a community pharmacist's training or credentials in veterinary pharmacotherapy and veterinary compounding may foster interprofessional trust.8,eleven,12 Therefore, properly trained community pharmacists can collaborate with veterinarians to go a trusted compounding resources in the care of their mutual patients.
Due to the availability of human generic medications for pet apply, information technology is often inexpensive for clients to obtain veterinary medications at community pharmacies.ix Furthermore, community pharmacies frequently offer more convenient operating hours than veterinary practices and specialized compounding pharmacies. Emerging themes from this study indicate medication cost and convenience are important factors for clients when making healthcare decisions for their pets. Thus, veterinarian compounding services provided in community pharmacies can service their need for veterinary compounding services while creating a new cash-only acquirement stream for the pharmacy. This report also demonstrated that pharmacists may be able to fulfill a need for veterinarians as well by reaching out to them to provide veterinarian compounding services.
There are several limitations associated with this study. Kickoff, the report was completed in a limited geographical area, and all study pharmacies are located within an urban area. The report sample lacked ethnic and gender diversity; therefore, information technology is uncertain if the study results are generalizable to more than various or to rural populations. Additionally, the survey period was relatively curt and the surveys used simply had face up validity. To the authors' knowledge, no validated instruments exist to measure perceived benefits, barriers, demand, and current business practices regarding veterinary compounding services. Targeted clients were identified by searching pharmacy dispensing software for patients designated as pets; if demographic information was not entered correctly for these patients, clients could take been missed or misidentified. Another limitation of this study is that one Likert scale question nowadays on the paper veterinarian survey was inadvertently omitted from the electronic survey; thus, the 5 veterinarians completing the survey electronically were not able to complete this survey item. The particular asked respondents to identify the degree with which they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "My patients' owners would benefit from having medications compounded past a community pharmacist." Lastly, a depression incidence of completed veterinarian surveys express statistical ability.
Hereafter research should arm-twist more veterinarian insight on benefits, barriers, and need for veterinary compounding services. Suggestions to achieve this include extending the data collection window, increasing the number of survey offer attempts to each veterinarian, and increasing the targeted veterinarian population. Additionally, surveying veterinarians before and later an education session on chemist compounding skills and knowledge of veterinary medications is another expanse of involvement. More research is needed to determine what factors affect clients' travel and spending habits related to veterinarian compounds provided in community pharmacies. Community pharmacies could consider conducting futurity research into the effectiveness and profitability of establishing business partnerships with veterinarian practices who exercise not offering veterinary compounding services. Measurement of veterinary compounding service benefits and barriers following implementation of veterinary compounding services in a community pharmacy has yet to be studied.
CONCLUSIONS
This study assessed client and veterinary perceptions of veterinarian compounding service benefits, barriers, and need in the community chemist's shop setting. Overall, client respondents identified more strengths and opportunities for veterinary compounding services in the community chemist's setting when compared to veterinarian respondents. Both clients and veterinarians identified a demand for veterinary compounding services and agreed their provision in community pharmacies would do good pets and clients in the community. Properly trained community pharmacists and their technicians have the potential to expand their business by reaching out to veterinarians to provide veterinarian compounding services.
Footnotes
Conflict OF Involvement
None.
Contributor Data
Shelby A. Bennett, Clinical Staff Pharmacist. Cherokee Principal Street Chemist's. Cherokee, IA (The states). [At the time study was conducted: PGY1 Community-Based Pharmacy Resident. Balls Nutrient Stores – Toll Chopper Pharmacy. Overland Park, KS. (United States).] moc.liamg@58795BAS.
Janelle F. Ruisinger, Clinical Professor. School of Chemist's, University of Kansas. Kansas Metropolis, KS (Usa). ude.cmuk@regnisiurj.
Emily Due south. Prohaska, Clinical Pharmacist. Balls Nutrient Stores – Hen House Chemist's. Olathe, KS (Us). moc.sdoofsllab@aksahorp.ylime.
Katelyn M. Steele, Clinical Pharmacist. Landmark Health. Overland Park, KS (U.s.a.). [At the time study was conducted: Pharmacist-in-Accuse. Balls Nutrient Stores - Price Chopper Pharmacy. Overland Park, KS (United States). moc.sdoofsllab@eleets.nyletak.
Brittany Fifty. Melton, Assistant Professor. School of Chemist's, University of Kansas. Kansas Metropolis, KS (United States). ude.cmuk@2notlemb.
REFERENCES
3. Sparkes AH, Cannon Chiliad, Church D, Fleeman Fifty, Harvey A, Hoenig Thousand, Peterson ME, Reusch CE, Taylor Southward, Rosenberg D. ISFM consensus guidelines on the practical management of diabetes mellitus in cats. J Feline Med Surg. 2015;17(3):235–250. doi: 10.1177/1098612X15571880. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
four. Ledford H. Stem cells for Snoopy: pet medicines spark a biotech blast. Nature. 2016;534(7607):303–304. doi: 10.1038/534303a. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
5. Reynolds CA, Oyama MA, Rush JE, Rozanski EA, Singletary GE, Brown DC, Cunningham SM, Fox PR, Bond B, Adin DB, Williams RM, MacDonald KA, Malakoff R, Sleeper MM, Schober KE, Petrie JP, Hogan DF. Perceptions of quality of life and priorities of owners of cats with heart disease. J Vet Intern Med. 2010;24(6):1421–1426. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-1676.2010.0583.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
half-dozen. Washington State University College of Veterinary Medicine. [(accessed February 19, 2018)]; Giving oral medications to your canis familiaris. Available at: world wide web.vetmed.wsu.edu/ClientED/dog_meds.aspx .
7. Frankel G, Kusno A, Louizos C. Five things every customs pharmacist should know when dispensing for 4-legged patients. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2016;149(two):99–106. doi: 10.1177/1715163516628543. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
8. Theberge CR, Sehgal I. Bringing More Veterinarian Pharmacy into the Pharmacy Curriculum. Am J Pharm Educ. 2016;80(five):89. doi: ten.5688/ajpe80589. [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
xi. Karriker One thousand, Wiebe 5. Pharmacists in Veterinary Education: Bridging the Gap. J Vet Med Educ. 2006;33(ii):248–252. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Cima G. Commutation errors: Surveys describe impairment from differences between prescriptions and drugs dispensed. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2014;245(5):462–482. doi: x.2460/javma.245.v.462. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
14. Yen W. Washington State Office of Fiscal Management. [(accessed nineteen February 19, 2018)]; How Long and How Far Practise Adults Travel and Will Adults Travel for Primary Care? Available at: http://www.ofm.wa.gov/researchbriefs/2013/brief070.pdf .
15. The Merck Veterinarian Manual. 11th ed. Kenilworth, NJ: Merck & Co; 2016. [Google Scholar]
16. Plumb DC. Veterinary Drug Handbook. Desk Edition. Wiley-Blackwell; 2018. [Google Scholar]
17. International Veterinary Information Service. [(accessed June 26, 2018)]; Available at: http://world wide web.ivis.org/home.asp .
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6207356/
0 Response to "Pets Are Family Too! Pharmacy Provided Pet Meds and Services"
Post a Comment