Agreement between Self-assessment and Assessment by Pharmacists According to the Criteria for Starred Sub-district Health Promoting Hospitals in Pharmacy and Health Consumer Protection in Chiangrai Province

Abstract

Objectives: To assess performance of sub-district health promoting hospitals (SDHPHs) in the area of pharmacy and health consumer protection, and also determine the concordance between self-assessment of performance by SDHPH staff members and that by pharmacists in Chiangrai province. Methods: The researchers modified the 2017 criteria on the starred SDHPHs of the Strategy and Planning Division, Ministry of Public Health into electronic form and sent to the staff in 217 SDHPHs for self-assessment and to pharmacists for assessing the performance of SDHPHs in the area they were in charge. The study investigated the correlation of assessment results in the areas of personnel, drug selection, quality and safety of drug dispensing, storages of drugs and medical supplies, safe and rational use of drugs, and health consumer protection. Results: One hundred and fifty four of those in SDHPHs (71.0%) and pharmacists in charges of 121 SDHPHs (55.8%) completed the questionnaires. Ninety-five SDHPHs (43.8%) had both the results from self-assessments and pharmacists in charge. Two assessments in the domains of pharmacy showed low to moderate agreement. Domains with low agreement were drug lists, drugs and medical supplies, having pharmacists and staff responsible for drugs, knowledge on medication, system to link to the information on patients’ hypersensitivity and use of high alert drugs, storage of drugs and medical supplies, and safe and rational use of drugs. Assessment in the domain of health consumer protection showed a low level of agreement. Conclusions: Consistency between self-assessment of SDHPH officers and pharmacists according to the criteria of the starred SDHPHs in the domains of pharmacy and public health consumer protection was low to moderate. Unclear criteria or their misunderstanding may contribute to poor agreement. Therefore, the criteria should be reviewed and improved for more reliable scoring. The revised criteria should be communicated to all parties to ensure understanding alignment.