Pharmacists’ and Pharmacy Technicians’ Attitudes and Experiences with Technician Administered Immunizations
Authors: DiMario Alexis , McCall Kenneth L , Couture Sara , Boynton Wendy 
Published: June 2022

Background

In response to the increased demand for healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act amendments and guidance authorized pharmacy technicians, who are not otherwise authorized in their state, to administer the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended immunizations and COVID-19 vaccines under pharmacist order. Subsequently, many pharmacies nationwide have expanded technician duties to include immunization administration.

Objectives

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the attitudes and experiences associated with technician administered immunizations among community pharmacists and technicians.

Methods

The cross-sectional study evaluated the primary endpoint through the completion of anonymous surveys containing peer reviewed questionnaires. Pharmacy technicians and their supervising pharmacists were selected to complete the survey at a grocery chain pharmacy located in 5 states across the Northeast if they completed the APhA immunization program and administered at least 1 immunization. Surveys were drafted using Microsoft Forms and results were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Chi square tests were utilized to evaluate the correlation between responses.

Results

A total of 268 survey responses was obtained with 171 responses coming from pharmacists and 97 responses coming from immunization certified technicians. Most pharmacists and pharmacy technicians responded that technicians could safely administer vaccines (87.1% and 96.9%, respectively) and competently process and bill vaccine services (90.6% and 99.0%, respectively). In addition, both participant populations responded that technician administered vaccines improved the workflow of vaccine services (76.6% and 82.5%, respectively) without increasing the likelihood of vaccine errors (56.1% and 78.3%, respectively). When compared with technicians, fewer pharmacists were confident in a technician’s ability to competently prepare vaccines (63.7% vs 91.8%, p <0.001). A statistically significant association was observed between an efficient process for immunizing patients and the likelihood of technician vaccination errors (χ2 = 14.36; p <0.01).

Conclusion

Pharmacy technicians continue to be a vital part of the healthcare team. Based on survey results, pharmacists and pharmacy technicians responded that technicians are not only competent enough to give immunizations but, should participate in more patient care duties. Multiple states are enacting legislation to include technician vaccine administration as a permanent component of their scope of practice.

Summary Bullets

What is already known about this subject?

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act was amended during the COVID-19 pandemic to authorize pharmacy technicians to administer the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended immunizations and COVID-19 vaccines under pharmacist order. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, multiple studies showed that pharmacists recognized pharmacy technicians as vital members of the healthcare team that enhanced the immunization process. In addition, studies found that most pharmacists were comfortable with pharmacy technicians collecting paperwork, processing, and billing vaccinations but did not agree with the idea of the pharmacy technician scope of practice expanding to include immunization administration.

What does this study add?

This study evaluates and compares pharmacists’ and pharmacy technicians’ attitudes and experiences associated with technician administered vaccines after the PREP Act authorized technicians to administer vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Disclosures

The authors of this study have no possible financial or personal relationships with commercial entities to disclose that may have a direct or indirect interest in the matter of this study.

Funding

None