Nearly three-quarters of GLP-1 users say more time with a pharmacist would improve their experience with the medication, and 83 percent of American adults say they would feel confident bringing questions about those drugs to a pharmacist, according to research commissioned by the National Association of Chain Drug Stores and released ahead of a Milken Institute report, as of October 28, 2026. The finding lands on the store counter rather than in the clinic, which turns a clinical conversation into an assortment, staffing and availability problem for retail chains.
What the survey found at the counter
The survey, fielded by Public Opinion Strategies, combined six focus groups with a national survey of 1,200 adults and deliberately oversampled current, former and likely GLP-1 users. That design explains why the user figures run higher than the general-population figures: 93 percent of users against 83 percent of all adults said they would feel confident putting a question about the medication to a pharmacist.
What respondents asked for was practical rather than clinical. Insurance coverage and cost came first, followed by managing side effects and understanding how to use and store the medication, with people new to therapy placing particular weight on basic education. None of those requests requires a new prescription, which is precisely why they end up being answered at a retail counter.
The starter kit question is a shelf question
Six categories, one bay
Eighty-nine percent of respondents said a starter kit with products and resources useful during treatment would be very or somewhat valuable, naming hydration and nutrition products, exercise equipment and educational materials. Read as a merchandising brief, that is a bay rather than a product: electrolyte drinks, protein and nutrition items, small exercise equipment and printed guidance, all within reach of the pharmacy counter.
Where availability breaks
The failure mode is familiar to anyone who has monitored distribution. A kit assembled from six categories fails when any single component is out of stock at that store, and the customer discovers the gap at the counter rather than on a product page. Availability has to be measured at store and SKU level, not at chain level, or the kit exists on paper and not on shelf.
That is also why distribution coverage on its own is a weak indicator here. A chain can report the kit listed in every store while the hydration item is missing in a third of them, and the customer experience is identical to a delisting. On-shelf availability across the whole basket is the number that matches what the survey respondents described to researchers.
Why side-effect support lands on store staff
| Request from respondents | Share | What it needs at store level |
|---|---|---|
| Information on physical activity | 91 percent | Staff script plus printed material |
| Referral to a dietitian or nutrition professional | 85 percent | Local referral list |
| Starter kit with products and resources | 89 percent | On-shelf availability across six categories |
| Help with coverage and cost | Top-ranked topic | Payer lookup at the counter |
The pattern across those four requests is that none of them is a dispensing task. Physical activity guidance, dietitian referrals and coverage checks are conversations, and conversations consume the resource the survey says is scarce, which is pharmacist time. A store that adds counselling without adding hours simply relocates the queue, so the 74 percent figure is a staffing statement as much as a service one.
Chains also have to decide where the conversation happens. A private consultation area keeps it clinical, while an open counter keeps it fast and keeps the pharmacist visible to everyone waiting. The survey does not settle that trade-off, and the Milken Institute report, scheduled for the 2026 Future of Health Summit, is expected to address the operating model rather than only the demand.
What the aisle has to measure next
For a category team, the useful next step is to convert the survey into a short list of store-level measurements and run them for a month before touching planograms. Demand evidence of this kind is directional at best, and the gap between what respondents say they value and what they buy at the counter is exactly the gap a pilot is meant to expose.
There is a caveat the numbers do not remove. The research was commissioned by a trade association representing chain pharmacies, and the public summary does not include the full questionnaire, the margins of error or the question order. The direction is credible, but the magnitudes should be treated as indicative until the underlying report and its methodology are published.
FAQ
Who conducted the GLP-1 pharmacy research?
Public Opinion Strategies carried it out for the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, using six focus groups and a national survey of 1,200 adults that oversampled current, former and likely GLP-1 users.
Does the survey prove that more pharmacist time improves outcomes?
No. It measures how users expect their experience to change, with 74 percent saying more pharmacist contact would help. It does not track clinical outcomes, so the causal claim remains untested by this data.
Why is a starter kit a distribution question rather than a marketing one?
Because the kit draws on several categories at once, including hydration and nutrition products and exercise equipment, so it only exists for the customer if every component is on shelf at that store on that day.
What should a chain measure first?
On-shelf availability of the kit components at store and SKU level, together with counselling requests by topic, because those two numbers show whether demand actually meets supply at the counter.
