Martine Kruijtbosch

130 Chap t e r 3. 3 TABLE 1: Pharmacists’ dominant MRPs per drug shortage scenario (267 pharmacists) Drug shortage scenario Pharmacists with dominant PE-MRPs Pharmacists with dominant RR-MRPs Pharmacists with dominant BO- MRPs Pharmacists with unclear dominant MRPs n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) Osteoporosis 199 (74.5) 13 (4.9) 13 (4.9) 42 (15.7) Contraceptive 164 (61.4) 24 (9.0) 8 (3.0) 71 (26.6) Parkinson’s 212 (79.4) 16 (6.0) 0 (0.0) 39 (14.6) All three scenarios 124 (46.4) 1 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 142 (53.2) TABLE 2: Determinants of a dominant PE-MRP (774 scenarios) Determinants Number of scenarios (%) in which pharmacists Odds ratio (95% CI) a have dominant PE-MRPs n = 551 do not have dominant PE-MRPs n = 223 Crude Adjusted b Gender Female 348 (63.2) 141 (63.2) 1 (reference) 1 (reference) Male 203 (36.8) 82 (36.8) 1.00 (0.73–1.38) 1.06 (0.76–1.49) Age < 45 years 315 (57.2) 126 (56.5) 1 (reference) 1 (reference) 45 years and above 236 (42.8) 97 (43.5) 0.97 (0.71–1.33) 1.12 (0.79–1.58) Job profile Locum pharmacist 113 (20.5) 28 (12.6) 1 (reference) 1 (reference) Managing pharmacist 438 (79.5) 195 (87.4) 0.56 (0.36–0.87) 0.51 (0.32–0.83) Type of pharmacy Not working in a chain pharmacy 340 (71.7) 134 (60.1) 1 (reference) 1 (reference) Working in a chain pharmacy 211 (38.3) 89 (39.9) 0.93 (0..68–1.28) 1.02 (0.73–1.42) Scenario Parkinson’s disease (high impact on patient outcomes) 203 (36.8) 55 (24.7) 1 (reference) 1 (reference) Contraceptive (medium impact on patient outcomes) 157 (28.5) 101 (45.3) 0.42 (0.28–0.62) 0.42 (0.28–0.62) Osteoporosis (low impact on patient outcomes) 191 (34.7) 67 (30.0) 0.77 (0.51–1.16) 0.77 (0.52–1.16) a Bold values indicate statistical significance. b Adjusted for all other variables.