Introduction
This research explored pharmacists' attitudes to MUR assessment following optional attendance at training courses on performance of MUR, highlighting issues around learning needs and the pharmacists' need for support and facilitation. It examined their attitudes to the assessment process, ascertained their learning needs after MUR assessment, and determined if different groups have different learning and/or facilitation needs whilst collecting any additional information generated on MUR assessment in general. Three different qualitative methodologies¹ were adopted to facilitate an in depth preliminary exploration of pharmacists' attitudes to assessment.

Methods
19 pharmacists, based on a purposive sample to represent a good distribution of demography, geography, sector of community pharmacy and years of practice who had undertaken MUR assessment participated in three structured workshops. These comprised of focus groups with a semi- structured format to explore i) overall impression of MUR assessment, ii)opinions on the format of the assessment iii) satisfaction with support provided and a consensus group using a form of nominal group technique to identify and prioritise learning needs and support required after assessment. A post assessment evaluation form was sent out prior to the workshops. The focus- groups were tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the principles of grounded theory. The adoption of triangulation, 'deviant case analysis' and reflexivity strengthened the research rigour.

Findings
Pharmacists expressed positive attitudes to assessment for new services. Key themes that emerged from the data included i) pharmacists need for feedback on assessment and performance ii) accreditation needs to ensure pharmacists feel, and are competent to perform an MUR iii) national standards for all assessments. Similar learning needs were identified and prioritised at the three workshops and through the three research instruments used. The pre-workshop written evaluation served to help pharmacists form their attitudes and identify their individual learning needs before attending the workshop, and provided specific detail of how the assessment process could be improved in terms of presentation, language, content and structure. The three consensus groups identified similar learning needs and support with the need to update clinical skills, develop consultation skills, and improve liaison with GPs and PCO taking priority.

Conclusion
The use of three qualitative methodologies enabled the collection of rich data. The key themes that emerge from this work will be used to inform a quantitative questionnaire based study of the larger MUR assessed pharmacist population.²