SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.19 issue3Impact of pharmacist-led care on glycaemic control of patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial in NigeriaPhysical activity promotion in community pharmacies: pharmacists' attitudes and behaviours author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Pharmacy Practice (Granada)

On-line version ISSN 1886-3655Print version ISSN 1885-642X

Abstract

CASTLE, Micah E  and  TAK, Casey R. Self-reported vs RUCA rural-urban classification among North Carolina pharmacists. Pharmacy Pract (Granada) [online]. 2021, vol.19, n.3, 2406.  Epub Sep 20, 2021. ISSN 1886-3655.  https://dx.doi.org/10.18549/pharmpract.2021.3.2406.

Background:

The various ways in which rurality is defined can have large-scale implications on the provision of healthcare services.

Objective:

The purpose of this study was to identify the relationship between self-perceived urban-rural distinction and the United States (US) Census tract-based Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) scheme that defines rurality among pharmacists.

Methods:

This was a secondary analysis of data collected through a web-based survey of licensed pharmacists in North Carolina. Respondents self-reported their workplace settings, zip codes, and the pharmacy services offered in their place of work. Zip codes were replaced with the corresponding RUCA codes. The relationship between self-reported classification and RUCA codes was analyzed and a chi square test was performed to measure statistical significance.

Results:

Of the original survey, 584 participants reported their workplace zip code and 579 reported their workplace setting (urban, rural). A significant difference was found between pharmacists who self-reported working in rural areas and the RUCA classifications – 94 (56.6%) of the 166 participants who reported working in “rural” areas were considered “urban” according to RUCA.

Conclusions:

A significant discordance between pharmacists' self-reported classification and the RUCA codes was found, with more respondents self-reporting their workplace area as “rural” as compared to the RUCA classification. Decision-makers examining the pharmacy workforce and pharmacy services should be aware of this discordance and its implications for resource allocation. We recommend the use of standardized metrics, when possible.

Keywords : Rural Population; Rural Health; Delivery of Health Care; Resource Allocation; Workplace; Pharmacists; Pharmacies; Pharmaceutical Services; Surveys and Questionnaires; North Carolina.

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )