Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Ethical Issue Scale for Community Pharmacy Setting (EISP): Development and Validation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many problems that arise when providing pharmacy services may contain some ethical components and the aims of this study were to develop and validate a scale that could assess difficulties of ethical issues, as well as the frequency of those occurrences in everyday practice of community pharmacists. Development and validation of the scale was conducted in three phases: (1) generating items for the initial survey instrument after qualitative analysis; (2) defining the design and format of the instrument; (3) validation of the instrument. The constructed Ethical Issue scale for community pharmacy setting has two parts containing the same 16 items for assessing the difficulty and frequency thereof. The results of the 171 completely filled out scales were analyzed (response rate 74.89 %). The Cronbach’s α value of the part of the instrument that examines difficulties of the ethical situations was 0.83 and for the part of the instrument that examined frequency of the ethical situations was 0.84. Test–retest reliability for both parts of the instrument was satisfactory with all Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values above 0.6, (for the part that examines severity ICC = 0.809, for the part that examines frequency ICC = 0.929). The 16-item scale, as a self assessment tool, demonstrated a high degree of content, criterion, and construct validity and test–retest reliability. The results support its use as a research tool to asses difficulty and frequency of ethical issues in community pharmacy setting. The validated scale needs to be further employed on a larger sample of pharmacists.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbas, T., & Charles, T. (2002). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. California: SAGE Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, A., Cribb, A., & Barber, N. (2009). Understanding pharmacists’ values: A qualitative study of ideals and dilemmas in UK pharmacy practice. Social Science and Medicine, 68(12), 2223–2230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, A. (2001). Research methods in health: investigating health and health services. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britten, N. (1995). Qualitative research: Qualitative interviews in medical research. British Medical Journal, 311(6999), 251–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaar, B., Brien, J., & Krass, I. (2005). Professional ethics in pharmacy: The Australian experience. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 13(3), 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. J., Bissell, P., & Wingfield, J. (2007a). Dilemmas in dispensing, problems in practice? Ethical issues and law in UK community pharmacy. Clinical Ethics, 2(2), 103–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. J., Bissell, P., & Wingfield, J. (2007b). A new prescription for empirical ethics research in pharmacy: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33(2), 82–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVon, H. A., Block, M. E., Moyle-Wright, P., Ernst, D. M., Hayden, S. J., Lazzara, D. J., et al. (2007). A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 39(2), 155–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40(4), 314–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fayers, P. M., & Machin, D. (2007). Quality of life: The assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, M., Hares, T., Spencer, J., Bradshaw, C., & Webb, I. (1993). The nominal group technique: A research tool for general practice? Family Practice, 10(1), 76–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haddad, A. (1989). Ethical problems in nursing. Dissertation Abstracts International. University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor MI.

  • Haddad, A. M. (1991). Ethical problems in pharmacy practice: A survey of difficulty and incidence. American Journal of Pharmacy Education, 55, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbert, D., Rees, J. A., & Smith, I. (2000). Ethical awareness of community pharmacists. International Journal of Pharmacy Practice, 8(2), 82–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst, S. A., Hull, S. C., DuVal, G., & Danis, M. (2005). How physicians face ethical difficulties: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31(1), 7–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst, S. A., Perrier, A., Pegoraro, R., Reiter-Theil, S., Forde, R., Slowther, A. M., et al. (2007). Ethical difficulties in clinical practice: Experiences of European doctors. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33(1), 51–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jons, J., & Hunter, D. (1995). Consensus methods for medical and health services research. British Medical Journal, 311(7001), 376–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalvemark, S., Hoglund, A. T., Hansson, M. G., Westerholm, P., & Arnetz, B. (2004). Living with conflicts: Ethical dilemmas and moral distress in the health care system. Social Science and Medicine, 58(6), 1075–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landeta, J. (2006). Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(5), 467–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowenthal, W. (1988). Ethical dilemmas in pharmacy. Journal of Medical Ethics, 14(1), 31–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parojcic, D. (2006). Razvoj etike u farmaciji od teorije do prakse. Beograd: Konstisi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope, C., Ziebland, S., & Mays, N. (2000). Analyzing qualitative data. British Medical Journal, 320(7227), 114–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (2011). The Delphi technique: Past, present, and future prospects: Introduction to the special issue. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(9), 1487–1490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sporrong, S. K., Hoglund, A. T., Hansson, M. G., Westerholm, P., & Arnetz, B. (2005). We are white coats whirling round: Moral distress in Swedish pharmacies. Pharmacy World & Science, 27(3), 223–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S. B. (2011). Sample size and grounded theory. Journal of Administration & Governance, 5(1), 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Delbecq, A. L. (1972). The nominal group as a research instrument for exploratory health studies. American Journal of Public Health, 62(3), 337–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank all the pharmacists who participated in the initial interviews; expert panel participants and to all the community pharmacists who participated for their contribution to this study. This paper is done within the framework of a project of Ministry of Science and Environmental Protection of the Republic of Serbia (project No. 41004).

Conflict of interests

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Subotica Pharmacy, Matije Gupca 26, 24000, Subotica, Serbia

    Tatjana Crnjanski & Svetlana Stojkov

  2. Department of Social Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Legislation, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Belgrade, Vojvode Stepe 450, 11221, Belgrade, Serbia

    Dusanka Krajnovic & Ivana Tadic

  3. Center for the Study of Bioethics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

    Dusanka Krajnovic

  4. Department of Business Informatics and Quantitative Methods, Faculty of Economics in Subotica, University of Novi Sad, Segedinski Put 9-11, 24000, Subotica, Serbia

    Mirko Savic

Authors
  1. Tatjana Crnjanski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dusanka Krajnovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ivana Tadic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Svetlana Stojkov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mirko Savic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tatjana Crnjanski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Crnjanski, T., Krajnovic, D., Tadic, I. et al. An Ethical Issue Scale for Community Pharmacy Setting (EISP): Development and Validation. Sci Eng Ethics 22, 497–508 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9587-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9587-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation