Designing a Human Resource Empowerment Model for Pharmacists in Pharmacies in Tehran
Abstract
Background: One of the most effective strategies to gain a competitive advantage in the current business environment is to enhance the efficiency of employees within organizations. The purpose of this research was to design a human resource empowerment model for pharmacists in pharmacies in Tehran. Methods: The research's statistical population includes two qualitative and quantitative components. In the qualitative part, 35 elite pharmacists from universities, industry, and the Ministry of Health were included, while the quantitative part involved a statistical sample of 220 individuals. For data analysis, the Grandad process of Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistical tests, independent one-sample t-test, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and structural equation modeling were used. SPSS 25 and AMOS 24 software were used to analyze the research data. Results: The findings showed that in the final development model of empowering pharmacists and personnel in Tehran courts, causal factors include psychological characteristics and training. The core category includes cultural and moral competence, as well as professional and technical competence. Background factors include commitment and skill. Intervening factors include moral values. Strategies include efficiency and speed. The consequences include creativity, innovation, and social responsibility. Conclusion: It can be concluded that continuous training workshops should be organized for pharmacists in Tehran pharmacies to enhance their specialized knowledge. Periodic in-service courses should be provided to these individuals based on their professional activities. The organization should consider social activities and social behaviors as focal points.
[1] Tonin FS, Aznar-Lou I, Pontinha VM, et al. 2021. Principles of pharmacoeconomic analysis: the case of pharmacist-led interventions. Pharm Pract (Granada). 19(1):2302. doi: 10.18549/PharmPract.2021.1.2302
[2] Abraham I, Hiligsmann M, Lee KK, et al. 2023. What to expect in 2024: important health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) trends. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research. 2023 Dec 22:1-8.
[3] Jakovljevic M, Verhaeghe N, Souliotis K, Krstic K. 2023. Challenges of pharmacoeconomics in global health arena—Contemporary momentum in the early 2020s. Frontiers in Public Health. 11:1189671. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1189671
[4] Patel N, Yanamala S, Rai M. 2024. Assessment of Extent and Quality of Pharmacoeconomic Studies in India Using Quality of Health Economic Studies Score: A Targeted Literature Review. Value in Health Regional Issues. 41:41-7. doi: 10.1016/j.vhir.2023.11.004
[5] Psenkova MB, Hlavinkova L, Visnansky M, et al. 2024. The Checklist for Standard Methodological Requirements and Reporting of Economic Evaluation of Medicines in Slovakia. Value in Health Regional Issues. 39:14-9. doi: 10.1016/j.vhir.2023.09.005
[6] Thomas D, Hiligsmann M, John D, et al. 2019. Pharmacoeconomic analyses and modeling. In: Clinical pharmacy education, practice and research. Elsevier; 2019. pp. 261-275.
[7] Ahmad A, Patel I, Parimilakrishnan S, et al. 2013. The role of pharmacoeconomics in current Indian healthcare system. J Res Pharm Pract. 2(1):3-9. doi: 10.4103/2279-042X.114081
[8] Paulden M. 2024. A Framework for the Fair Pricing of Medicines. PharmacoEconomics. 42(2):145-64. doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01190-x
[9] Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. 2013. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Bmj. 346. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e3598
[10] Husereau D, Drummond M, Augustovski F, et al. 2022. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations. MDM Policy & Practice. 7(1):23814683211061097. doi: 10.1177/23814683211061097
[11] Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
[12] Leemhuis H, Seifert R. Prescriptions of homeopathic remedies at the expense of the German statutory health insurance from 1985 to 2021: scientific, legal and pharmacoeconomic analysis. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2024 Mar 2. doi: 10.1007/s00210-024-03005-x. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38430230.
[13] Ostermann T, Burkart J, De Jaegere S, Raak C, Simoens S. Overview and quality assessment of health economic evaluations for homeopathic therapy: an updated systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2024 Jan;24(1):117-142. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2266136. Epub 2024 Jan 18. PMID: 37795998.
[14] Manchanda RK, Kulhashreshtha M. Cost effectiveness and efficacy of homeopathy in primary health care units of the Government of Delhi–a study. Allgemeine Homöopathische Zeitung. 2005;250(02):33. Available at: Homeopathy Cost Effectiveness Study.
[15] Kass B, Icke K, Witt CM, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatment with additional enrollment to a homeopathic integrated care contract in Germany. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:872. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05706-4.
[16] Colas A, Danno K, Tabar C, Ehreth J, Duru G. Economic impact of homeopathic practice in general medicine in France. Health Econ Rev. 2015 Dec;5(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s13561-015-0055-5. PMID: 26152791; PMCID: PMC4495089.
[17] Viksveen P, Dymitr Z, Simoens S. Economic evaluations of homeopathy: a review. Eur J Health Econ. 2014 Mar;15(2):157-74. doi: 10.1007/s10198-013-0462-7. PMID: 23397477.
[18] Rita K, Tapas K, Afroz S, Aafiya S, Hiral B, Omkar K, Gulfisha M, Uday B. Assessment of social and economic impact of healthcare with homoeopathy for haemophilia in cognizance with patients’ perspective: a cross-sectional survey. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2023 Feb 28;10(3):1081-90. Available at: Int J Community Med Public Health Article.
[19] Ostermann JK, Witt CM, Reinhold T. A retrospective cost-analysis of additional homeopathic treatment in Germany: Long-term economic outcomes. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(9):e0182897. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182897.
[20] Roll S, Reinhold T, Pach D, Brinkhaus B, Icke K, Staab D, Jäckel T, Wegscheider K, Willich SN, Witt CM. Comparative effectiveness of homoeopathic vs. conventional therapy in usual care of atopic eczema in children: long-term medical and economic outcomes. PLoS One. 2013 Jan 31;8(1):e54973.
[2] Abraham I, Hiligsmann M, Lee KK, et al. 2023. What to expect in 2024: important health economics and outcomes research (HEOR) trends. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research. 2023 Dec 22:1-8.
[3] Jakovljevic M, Verhaeghe N, Souliotis K, Krstic K. 2023. Challenges of pharmacoeconomics in global health arena—Contemporary momentum in the early 2020s. Frontiers in Public Health. 11:1189671. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1189671
[4] Patel N, Yanamala S, Rai M. 2024. Assessment of Extent and Quality of Pharmacoeconomic Studies in India Using Quality of Health Economic Studies Score: A Targeted Literature Review. Value in Health Regional Issues. 41:41-7. doi: 10.1016/j.vhir.2023.11.004
[5] Psenkova MB, Hlavinkova L, Visnansky M, et al. 2024. The Checklist for Standard Methodological Requirements and Reporting of Economic Evaluation of Medicines in Slovakia. Value in Health Regional Issues. 39:14-9. doi: 10.1016/j.vhir.2023.09.005
[6] Thomas D, Hiligsmann M, John D, et al. 2019. Pharmacoeconomic analyses and modeling. In: Clinical pharmacy education, practice and research. Elsevier; 2019. pp. 261-275.
[7] Ahmad A, Patel I, Parimilakrishnan S, et al. 2013. The role of pharmacoeconomics in current Indian healthcare system. J Res Pharm Pract. 2(1):3-9. doi: 10.4103/2279-042X.114081
[8] Paulden M. 2024. A Framework for the Fair Pricing of Medicines. PharmacoEconomics. 42(2):145-64. doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01190-x
[9] Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. 2013. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Bmj. 346. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e3598
[10] Husereau D, Drummond M, Augustovski F, et al. 2022. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) statement: updated reporting guidance for health economic evaluations. MDM Policy & Practice. 7(1):23814683211061097. doi: 10.1177/23814683211061097
[11] Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
[12] Leemhuis H, Seifert R. Prescriptions of homeopathic remedies at the expense of the German statutory health insurance from 1985 to 2021: scientific, legal and pharmacoeconomic analysis. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2024 Mar 2. doi: 10.1007/s00210-024-03005-x. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38430230.
[13] Ostermann T, Burkart J, De Jaegere S, Raak C, Simoens S. Overview and quality assessment of health economic evaluations for homeopathic therapy: an updated systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2024 Jan;24(1):117-142. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2266136. Epub 2024 Jan 18. PMID: 37795998.
[14] Manchanda RK, Kulhashreshtha M. Cost effectiveness and efficacy of homeopathy in primary health care units of the Government of Delhi–a study. Allgemeine Homöopathische Zeitung. 2005;250(02):33. Available at: Homeopathy Cost Effectiveness Study.
[15] Kass B, Icke K, Witt CM, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatment with additional enrollment to a homeopathic integrated care contract in Germany. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20:872. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05706-4.
[16] Colas A, Danno K, Tabar C, Ehreth J, Duru G. Economic impact of homeopathic practice in general medicine in France. Health Econ Rev. 2015 Dec;5(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s13561-015-0055-5. PMID: 26152791; PMCID: PMC4495089.
[17] Viksveen P, Dymitr Z, Simoens S. Economic evaluations of homeopathy: a review. Eur J Health Econ. 2014 Mar;15(2):157-74. doi: 10.1007/s10198-013-0462-7. PMID: 23397477.
[18] Rita K, Tapas K, Afroz S, Aafiya S, Hiral B, Omkar K, Gulfisha M, Uday B. Assessment of social and economic impact of healthcare with homoeopathy for haemophilia in cognizance with patients’ perspective: a cross-sectional survey. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2023 Feb 28;10(3):1081-90. Available at: Int J Community Med Public Health Article.
[19] Ostermann JK, Witt CM, Reinhold T. A retrospective cost-analysis of additional homeopathic treatment in Germany: Long-term economic outcomes. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(9):e0182897. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182897.
[20] Roll S, Reinhold T, Pach D, Brinkhaus B, Icke K, Staab D, Jäckel T, Wegscheider K, Willich SN, Witt CM. Comparative effectiveness of homoeopathic vs. conventional therapy in usual care of atopic eczema in children: long-term medical and economic outcomes. PLoS One. 2013 Jan 31;8(1):e54973.
Files | ||
Issue | Vol 10 No 2 (2024) | |
Section | Original Article(s) | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/jppm.v10i2.16831 | |
Keywords | ||
Empowerment Ground Theory Human Power |
Rights and permissions | |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
How to Cite
1.
Delgosha S, Annabi M. Designing a Human Resource Empowerment Model for Pharmacists in Pharmacies in Tehran. JPPM. 2024;10(2):1-12.