Funding issues and options for pharmacists providing sessional services to rural hospitals in Australia

Abstract

Objective. Many of Australia’s rural hospitals operate without an on-site pharmacist. In some, community pharmacists have sessional contracts to provide medication management services to inpatients. This paper discusses the funding arrangements of identified sessional employment models to raise awareness of options for other rural hospitals. Methods. Semistructured one-on-one interviews were conducted with rural pharmacists with experience in a sessional employment role (n = 8) or who were seeking sessional arrangements (n = 4). Participants were identified via publicity and referrals. Interviews were conducted via telephone or Skype for ~40–55 min each, recorded and analysed descriptively. Results. A shortage of state funding and reliance on federal funding was reported. Pharmacists accredited to provide medication reviews claimed remuneration via these federal schemes; however, restrictive criteria limited their scope of services. Funds pooling to subsidise remuneration for the pharmacists was evident and arrangements with local community pharmacies provided business frameworks to support sessional services. Conclusion. Participants were unaware of each other’s models of practice, highlighting the need to share information and these findings. Several similarities existed, namely, pooling funds and use of federal medication review remuneration. Findings highlighted the need for a stable remuneration pathway and business model to enable wider implementation of sessional pharmacist models.