Background: The International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP) has over 3500 members across over 114 countries. ISOPP's strategic objectives are membership engagement, empowering the global oncology pharmacy community, facilitating professional development, and advocating for advancement. Aligning with these objectives, this research aimed to describe global oncology pharmacy service provision and knowledge requirements.
Method: Fifty-three ISOPP global oncology pharmacy leaders from 45 countries were invited to complete a survey. Questions in the survey explored whether protected titles existed for oncology pharmacy practitioners, the oncology pharmacy service levels that were being offered from the seven levels proposed, knowledge requirements for these service levels, and practitioner access to education. Free text comments were analysed for context or themes and described descriptively. Based on responses, the proposed service levels and required knowledge were reviewed to establish the ISOPP Oncology Pharmacy Service Levels.
Results: Responses from 35 countries were received. Thirty-five (100%) participants reported that pharmacist was a protected title, and 18 (51%) participants reported that pharmacy technician was protected. However, oncology pharmacist was a protected title in one (3%) country only, Singapore. Fourteen (40%) countries delivered all seven oncology pharmacy service levels, and 35 (100%) countries delivered at least three levels. Some participants reported being unfamiliar with some of the survey terminology; this information was used to clarify the wording of the service levels and knowledge requirements. For many countries, the availability of, and the need for, postgraduate education to improve practice was emphasised.
Conclusion: The findings from this global review have culminated in the establishment of the ISOPP Oncology Pharmacy Service Levels. Results will aid professional development and advancement, by connecting countries with mentoring opportunities and resources, and establishing a benchmark for the future growth of services. It is recommended that another review be carried out in four to five years' time.