Community Pharmacists' Perspectives and Experiences of Deprescribing in Québec, Canada: Findings From a Survey
- 1Faculty of Pharmacy, Université Laval Quebec City Quebec Canada
- 2VITAM ‐ Centre for Sustainable Health Research Quebec City Quebec Canada
- 3Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal Montreal Quebec Canada
Abstract
Background: Community pharmacists in Quebec can bill for deprescribing. However, uptake remains low. We aimed to explore how community pharmacists perceive and engage in deprescribing.
Methods: Community pharmacists were invited to complete an online survey through a pharmacists' social media group and a newsletter. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and univariate chi‐square tests.
Results: Among 366 respondents, most were women (n = 269; 74%), worked full‐time (n = 282; 77%), had time for clinical interventions (n = 223; 61%), while 53% (n = 193) had fewer than 11 years of experience. Three quarters (n = 271) reported initiating deprescribing at least monthly. Side effects (n = 273; 75%) and patients' requests (n = 220; 60%) were more common reasons for deprescribing. More than 70% (n = 268) reported that prescribers usually accepted recommendations. Initial and follow‐up consultations were systematically billed by 50% (n = 183) and 48% (n = 174) of respondents, respectively. Deprescribing interventions and billing practices were more common among pharmacists with dedicated clinical time and those working full time (all p < 0.01). Main barriers to billing were insufficient training (n = 217; 59%), uncertainty about reimbursement eligibility (n = 127; 35%) and lack of time (n = 112; 31%). Integrated software was the most common facilitator (n = 246; 67%).
Conclusion: Deprescribing was commonly reported among respondents and was often prompted by clinical concerns and patient requests. Billing uncertainties and time constraints remained important barriers, highlighting opportunities to better support deprescribing in community pharmacy.
Related
- Experiences of Shared Decision Making for Cancer Screening Among Deaf, DeafBlind, and Hard of Hearing Adults Participating in an ASL-Using Community Health Navigator Program: Preliminary Findings From a Nested Qualitative Study
- Less is more: Effective deprescribing in community settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- Reconfiguring clinical pharmacists’ roles under China’s DRG payment system: perspectives from clinical pharmacists and physicians in multidisciplinary teams
- Pharmacists’ role in recognising medication-related oral health risks in aged care: a qualitative study of pharmacists’ and dentists’ perspectives
- Antimicrobial stewardship in acute exacerbations of COPD: a qualitative study of hospital pharmacists’ perspectives
BibTeX
@article{calfat2026community,
title = {{Community Pharmacists' Perspectives and Experiences of Deprescribing in Québec, Canada: Findings From a Survey}},
author = {Alexandre Campeau Calfat and Béatrice Martin and Caroline Sirois},
journal = {Basic \& clinical pharmacology \& toxicology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1111/bcpt.70328},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13722938},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Community Pharmacists' Perspectives and Experiences of Deprescribing in Québec, Canada: Findings From a Survey
AU - Alexandre Campeau Calfat
AU - Béatrice Martin
AU - Caroline Sirois
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/31
JO - Basic & clinical pharmacology & toxicology
DO - 10.1111/bcpt.70328
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13722938
AB - Background: Community pharmacists in Quebec can bill for deprescribing. However, uptake remains low. We aimed to explore how community pharmacists perceive and engage in deprescribing. Methods: Community pharmacists were invited to complete an online survey through a pharmacists' social media group and a newsletter. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and univariate chi‐square tests. Results: Among 366 respondents, most were women (n = 269; 74%), worked full‐time (n = 282; 77%), had time for clinical interventions (n = 223; 61%), while 53% (n = 193) had fewer than 11 years of experience. Three quarters (n = 271) reported initiating deprescribing at least monthly. Side effects (n = 273; 75%) and patients' requests (n = 220; 60%) were more common reasons for deprescribing. More than 70% (n = 268) reported that prescribers usually accepted recommendations. Initial and follow‐up consultations were systematically billed by 50% (n = 183) and 48% (n = 174) of respondents, respectively. Deprescribing interventions and billing practices were more common among pharmacists with dedicated clinical time and those working full time (all p < 0.01). Main barriers to billing were insufficient training (n = 217; 59%), uncertainty about reimbursement eligibility (n = 127; 35%) and lack of time (n = 112; 31%). Integrated software was the most common facilitator (n = 246; 67%). Conclusion: Deprescribing was commonly reported among respondents and was often prompted by clinical concerns and patient requests. Billing uncertainties and time constraints remained important barriers, highlighting opportunities to better support deprescribing in community pharmacy.
SN - 1742-7835
SN - 1742-7843
ER -