Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research article

Stakeholders’ expectations and perceived effects of the pharmacy ownership liberalization reform in Sweden: a qualitative interview study

Authors: Kristin Wisell, Ulrika Winblad, Sofia Kälvemark Sporrong

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Reforms in the health-care sector, including the pharmacy sector, can have different rationales. The Swedish pharmacies were prior to 2009 organized in a state-owned monopoly. In 2009, a liberalization of the ownership took place, in which a majority of the pharmacies were sold to private owners. The rationales for this liberalization changed profoundly during the preparatory work, making it probable that other rationales than the ones first expressed existed. The aim of this study was to explore the underlying rationales (not stated in official documents) for the liberalization in the Swedish pharmacy sector, and also to compare the expectations with the perceived outcomes.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from key stakeholder organizations; i.e., political, patient, and professional organizations. The analysis was performed in steps, and themes were developed in an inductive manner.

Results

One expectation among the political organization participants was that the ownership liberalization would create opportunities for ideas. The competition introduced in the market was supposed to lead to a more diversified pharmacy sector. After the liberalization, the participants in favor of the liberalization were surprised that the pharmacies were so similar.
Among the professional organization participants, one important rationale for the liberalization was to get better use of the pharmacists’ knowledge. However, all the professional, and some of the patient organization participants, thought that the counseling in the pharmacies had deteriorated after the liberalization.
As expected in the interviews, the post-liberalization pharmacy sector consists of more pharmacies. However, an unexpected perceived effect of the liberalization was, among participants from all the stakeholder groups, less access to prescription medicines in the pharmacies.

Conclusions

This study showed that the political organization participants had an ideological basis for their opinion. The political stakeholders did not have a clear view about what the liberalization should lead to, apart from abolishing the monopoly. The perceived effects are quite similar in the different stakeholder groups, and not as positive as were expected.
Footnotes
1
In the interview material, different words were used for the ownership liberalization; − i.e., reregulation and deregulation.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Vogler S, Habimana K, Arts D. Does deregulation in community pharmacy impact accessibility of medicines, quality of pharmacy service and costs? Evidence from nine European countries. Health Policy. 2014;117:311–27.CrossRefPubMed Vogler S, Habimana K, Arts D. Does deregulation in community pharmacy impact accessibility of medicines, quality of pharmacy service and costs? Evidence from nine European countries. Health Policy. 2014;117:311–27.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Anell C. Deregulating the pharmacy market: the case of Iceland and Norway. Health Policy. 2005;1:9–17.CrossRef Anell C. Deregulating the pharmacy market: the case of Iceland and Norway. Health Policy. 2005;1:9–17.CrossRef
3.
4.
go back to reference Simonet D. The New Public Management theory and European health-care reforms. Can Public Adm. 2008;51:4617–35. Simonet D. The New Public Management theory and European health-care reforms. Can Public Adm. 2008;51:4617–35.
5.
go back to reference Tolofari S. New Public Management and Education. Policy Futures in Education. 2005;3(1):75–89.CrossRef Tolofari S. New Public Management and Education. Policy Futures in Education. 2005;3(1):75–89.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Savas ES. Privatization: The key to better government. Chatham House: Chatham NJ; 1987. Savas ES. Privatization: The key to better government. Chatham House: Chatham NJ; 1987.
7.
go back to reference Christensen T, Lægreid P. The Ashgate research companion to new public management. Farnham: Ashgate; 2011. Christensen T, Lægreid P. The Ashgate research companion to new public management. Farnham: Ashgate; 2011.
8.
go back to reference Boyne GA. Competitive tendering in local government: a review of theory and evidence. Public Adm. 1998;76(4):695–712.CrossRef Boyne GA. Competitive tendering in local government: a review of theory and evidence. Public Adm. 1998;76(4):695–712.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Dent M, Chandler J, Barry J, editors. Questioning the New Public Management. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2004. Dent M, Chandler J, Barry J, editors. Questioning the New Public Management. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2004.
12.
go back to reference Lind J, Schafheutle E, Hägg AN, Sporrong SK. General sale of non-prescription medicinal products: Comparing legislation in two European countries. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2016;12(1):68–77.CrossRefPubMed Lind J, Schafheutle E, Hägg AN, Sporrong SK. General sale of non-prescription medicinal products: Comparing legislation in two European countries. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2016;12(1):68–77.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Andersson S. Organizational status and performance: the case of the Swedish pharmacies. Public Adm. 1995;73:287–301.CrossRef Andersson S. Organizational status and performance: the case of the Swedish pharmacies. Public Adm. 1995;73:287–301.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Wisell K, Winblad U, Sporrong SK. Reregulation of the Swedish pharmacy sector – A qualitative content analysis of the political rationale. Health Policy. 2015;119:648–53.CrossRefPubMed Wisell K, Winblad U, Sporrong SK. Reregulation of the Swedish pharmacy sector – A qualitative content analysis of the political rationale. Health Policy. 2015;119:648–53.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Miles MB, Huberman AM. Focusing and bounding the collection of data. In: Qualitative data analysis. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications; 1994. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Focusing and bounding the collection of data. In: Qualitative data analysis. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications; 1994.
22.
go back to reference Fossey E, Harvey C, McDermott F, Davidson L. Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Aust NZJ Psychiatry. 2002;36(6):717–32.CrossRef Fossey E, Harvey C, McDermott F, Davidson L. Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Aust NZJ Psychiatry. 2002;36(6):717–32.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: A strategy for qualitative analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40:795.CrossRefPubMed Malterud K. Systematic text condensation: A strategy for qualitative analysis. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40:795.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Robson C. The analysis and interpretation of qualitative data. In: Real World Research. 3rd ed. Padstow: Wiley; 2011. Robson C. The analysis and interpretation of qualitative data. In: Real World Research. 3rd ed. Padstow: Wiley; 2011.
25.
go back to reference Gruening G. Origin and theoretical basis of New Public Management. Intern Publ Manag J. 2001;4:1–25.CrossRef Gruening G. Origin and theoretical basis of New Public Management. Intern Publ Manag J. 2001;4:1–25.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference arsen JB, Vrangbæk K, Traulsen JM. Advocacy coalitions and pharmacy policy in Denmark – Solid cores with fuzzy edges. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63:212–24. arsen JB, Vrangbæk K, Traulsen JM. Advocacy coalitions and pharmacy policy in Denmark – Solid cores with fuzzy edges. Soc Sci Med. 2006;63:212–24.
27.
go back to reference Morgall JM, Almarsdóttir AB. No struggle, no strength: how pharmacists lost their monopoly. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:1247–58.CrossRefPubMed Morgall JM, Almarsdóttir AB. No struggle, no strength: how pharmacists lost their monopoly. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48:1247–58.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Carlsson JR, Renberg T, Sporrong SK. Drug experts of the future, today? -depiction of the pharmacist profession in Swedish professional and lay print media. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2012;8:133–44.CrossRefPubMed Carlsson JR, Renberg T, Sporrong SK. Drug experts of the future, today? -depiction of the pharmacist profession in Swedish professional and lay print media. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2012;8:133–44.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Sveriges farmaceuter. The Swedish Pharmacists (formerly Swedish Pharmaceutical Association). Consultation response regarding Swedish Government Official Report 2008: 2008;p. 4 Sveriges farmaceuter. The Swedish Pharmacists (formerly Swedish Pharmaceutical Association). Consultation response regarding Swedish Government Official Report 2008: 2008;p. 4
30.
go back to reference Yost J, Dobbins M, Traynor R, DeCorby K, Workentine S, Greco L. Tools to support evidence-informed public health decision making. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:728.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yost J, Dobbins M, Traynor R, DeCorby K, Workentine S, Greco L. Tools to support evidence-informed public health decision making. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:728.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Stakeholders’ expectations and perceived effects of the pharmacy ownership liberalization reform in Sweden: a qualitative interview study
Authors
Kristin Wisell
Ulrika Winblad
Sofia Kälvemark Sporrong
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1637-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

BMC Health Services Research 1/2016 Go to the issue