BACKGROUND: Penicillin allergy (PenA) prevalence is approximately 6%, but fewer than 10% of these people are expected to be truly allergic. Consequently, a significant proportion of the population are prescribed alternative antibiotics with potential increased risk of acquiring multi-drug resistant bacteria and worse health outcomes. The ALABAMA trial aimed to determine if a penicillin allergy assessment pathway (PAAP) initiated in primary care, is effective in de-labelling erroneous records, improving antibiotic prescribing and patient outcomes. AIM: To investigate healthcare professionals' experiences of the ALABAMA trial. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in general practice in England. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (including general practitioners, research nurses, pharmacists) who delivered the trial. Interviews explored their views about de-labelling incorrect PenA records, their role(s) in the trial, and, where relevant, their experience of prescribing following de-labelling. RESULTS: Healthcare professionals ( CONCLUSIONS: GPs welcomed and accepted the PAAP as a means of correcting erroneous PenA records. There is great potential for PAAP to be supported in primary care if testing becomes more accessible.