Fig 1.
Overview of the two study parts with different levels of data collection and comparison.
Table 1.
Characteristics of participants in the self-report (study part A) [N total = 1068].
Fig 2.
Self-reported levels of importance (I) of the parameters during a self-medication consultation.
The twelve parameters were rated by 1067 respondents in the self-report (study part A). One participant did not specify the importance of the parameters.
Fig 3.
Self-reported levels of difficulty (II) of the parameters during a self-medication consultation.
The twelve parameters were rated by 1068 respondents in the self-report (study part A).
Fig 4.
Rated frequency (III) of addressing the twelve counselling parameters during a self-medication consultation.
The twelve parameters were rated by 1068 respondents in the self-report (study part A).
Fig 5.
Pharmaceutical staff’s view of barriers to an appropriate counselling process.
Answers to the question “Which of the following factors prevents you from providing an optimal patient consultation for self-medication?” [Multiple choice; N (total) = 1068].
Table 2.
Characteristics of participants in the non-participant observation (study part B) [N total = 24].
Fig 6.
Observed frequency (V) of addressing the twelve parameters in the observation (study part B).
170 observed real-life self-medication enquiries were evaluated for the observed frequency (V) of addressing the parameters of information gathering (1). In 162 (100%) dispensed product processes the six parameters of information provision (2) were assessed.