Perceived Value of Teaching and Learning Curriculum Programs Among Pharmacy Practice Department Chairs

Objective. To determine the perceived value that pharmacy practice department chairs ascribe to pharmacy faculty candidates having completed a teaching and learning curriculum (TLC) program and related activities.Methods. An 18-item survey instrument was created that was intended to capture the overall impressions of pharmacy practice chairs regarding the value of TLC programs, relative importance compared to other accomplishments (eg, residency completion, board certification), and importance of specific activities. Following pilot testing and establishment of intra-rater reliability, invitations to complete the electronic survey instrument were sent to pharmacy practice chairs (or their equivalent) at accredited Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) programs in the United States.Results. Of the 127 pharmacy practice chairs invited, 53 completed the survey (response rate of 41.7%). The majority of respondents held a PharmD degree (90.6%), had been in their role of chair for zero to five years (60.4%), and represented a private institution (54.7%). The majority of respondents who answered the question (32 of 49) felt it was very important or important (16.3% and 49.0%, respectively) that teaching experiences be completed within a formal teaching and learning curriculum program. These programs were believed to be most important for candidates with less than five years of professional experience. Teaching and learning curriculum programs were not deemed to be more important than other accomplishments by most responders. The perceived most important TLC program activities were instruction on didactic and experiential teaching strategies, and experience developing learning objectives, developing examination items, evaluating examination results, and facilitating case conferences or practice laboratory activities.Conclusion. Teaching and learning curriculum programs may provide the foundational experiences needed for pharmacy graduates to stand out among other candidates, although department chairs’ perceptions of the value of teaching and learning curriculum experiences varied.     

Redesign of a Statewide Teaching Certificate Program for Pharmacy Residents

Objectives. To identify and assess changes made to the Indiana Pharmacy Resident Teaching Certificate program over 10 years to adapt to the growing number and changing needs of pharmacy educators in the next generation.Design. In 2011, all resident program participants and directors were sent an electronic survey instrument designed to assess the perceived value of each program component.Assessment. Since 2003, the number of program participants has tripled, and the program has expanded to include additional core requirements and continuing education. Participants generally agreed that the speakers, seminar topics, seminar video recordings, and seminar offerings during the fall semester were program strengths. The program redesign included availability of online registration; a 2-day conference format; retention of those seminars perceived to be most important, according to survey results; implementation of a registration fee; electronic teaching portfolio submission; and establishment of teaching mentors.Conclusion. With the growing number of residents and residency programs, pharmacy teaching certificate programs must accommodate more participants while continuing to provide quality instruction, faculty mentorship, and opportunities for classroom presentations and student precepting. The Indiana Pharmacy Resident Teaching Certificate program has successfully evolved over the last 10 years to meet these challenges by implementing successful programmatic changes in response to residency program director and past program participant feedback.     

The Importance of Research and Scholarly Activity in Pharmacy Training

Regardless of practice setting, it is imperative that pharmacists be able to either participate in generating new knowledge or use the ever‐expanding body of literature to guide patient care. However, competing priorities in Pharm.D. curricula and residency training programs have resulted in limited emphasis on acquiring research and scholarly skills. Factors likely contributing to this reduced focus include the lack of curricular and postgraduate training standards emphasizing the development of research skills, time to commit to scholarly activity, and accessibility to experienced mentors. Strategies for increasing scholarly activity for pharmacy students and residents should therefore continue to be a focus of professional degree and residency training programs. Several resources are available for academic planners, program directors, and institutions to augment scholarly experience for pharmacy trainees and clinicians. This commentary highlights the importance of providing research opportunities for students and residents, describes the potential barriers to these activities, and provides recommendations on how to increase the instruction and mentoring of trainees to generate and use research.     

Perceived value and outcomes of residency projects.

Residency program directors' attitudes toward residency projects were studied. A questionnaire about the residency project experience was mailed in January 2000 to 446 pharmacy practice residency program and specialty residency program directors in the program database of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Recipients responded to opinion statements on a 5-point scale. Responses to the opinion statements were separated into seven categories for analysis. A total of 278 usable questionnaires were returned, for a raw response rate of 63.6%. During the preceding three years, residency directors had served as primary advisors on 917 projects; 171 had served as advisor on at least one of every type of project allowed in the accreditation standards. Of the 917 projects, 364 were presented at national professional meetings, 124 were published, and 484 were believed to have resulted in a positive change in pharmacy services. There were no significant differences in total response scores among any of the subgroups analyzed. There was strong agreement that residency projects were valuable and should continue to be part of the residency program experience. The directors' views of the importance of original research as a project option were more neutral. Overall residency program directors had positive perceptions of the value of residency projects to both residents and institutions and believed that they should continue to be a requirement of residency programs.     

Pharmacy resident participation in cardiopulmonary resuscitation events.

PURPOSE: An electronically administered cross-sectional survey was conducted to establish the rate of pharmacy resident participation in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) events at pharmacy residency programs throughout the United States and Puerto Rico. METHODS: A 46-item questionnaire was developed and sent by e-mail to pharmacy residency program directors. The recipients were given one month to complete the survey. Responses were screened for duplicate answers, and the most complete survey was included in the analysis. The survey dealt with residency program demographics and sought information about required life-support certifications for pharmacy personnel, institution-specific training methods for medical emergencies employed by pharmacy departments, responsibilities of pharmacy personnel who respond to CPR events, and evaluation methods used to assess resident performance in CPR events. RESULTS: A total of 745 pharmacy residency directors were surveyed. Responses were received from 190 residency program directors, which represented 221 residency programs. The three most common residency program settings were community (not-for- profit) hospitals, college and university hospitals, and government hospitals. Thirty percent of respondents required pharmacy resident response to CPR events, while 38% made this opportunity optional. In 85% of programs that required or offered resident response to CPR events, there was a formal CPR team. The three primary roles fulfilled by pharmacists in medical emergencies were provision of drug information, drug admixture, and documentation; pharmacy resident duties mirrored these roles. CONCLUSION: Pharmacy resident response to CPR events was required in approximately 30% of responding pharmacy residency programs. Various methods were used in educating, assessing, and evaluating pharmacy residents in this role.     

Assessment of teaching experiences completed during accredited pharmacy residency programs

Objectives

To examine teaching experiences in residency programs accredited by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) and how they relate to career choices of residents.

Methods

An online survey instrument was developed that asked former residents about the type of teaching experiences they completed during their residency and the effect of these experiences on the decision to pursue an academic career. Our target population was pharmacists completing accredited residencies from 2003-2006.

Results

Four hundred fifty-five (11% of the target population) pharmacists who had completed a residency responded. Former residents who completed 2 years of postgraduate training were significantly more likely to participate in all teaching experiences identified by this survey (p < 0.008). Former residents in college- or school-affiliated programs were significantly more likely to participate in all of the teaching experiences identified (p < 0.003). Former residents who went on to take a faculty position were more likely to have given lectures, participated in problem-based learning (PBL) or small group seminars (SGS), and served as a primary preceptor (p < 0.008) during their residency.

Conclusions

Residents who eventually became faculty members were more likely to have acquired training and experience in teaching during their residency programs.     

Chief resident in pharmacy residency programs.

PURPOSE: The frequency of chief resident positions in pharmacy residency programs and the roles and responsibilities of such chief residents are described. METHODS: A Web-based questionnaire was developed to determine the current state and interest of residency program directors (RPDs) in chief residency programs within pharmacy residency training. RPDs were identified through directories of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists and the American College of Clinical Pharmacy. RESULTS: Of the 892 surveys distributed, 34 were returned as undeliverable and 335 responses were received (effective response rate, 39.0%). Over one quarter of respondents (28.4%) had a chief resident, resident-in-charge, or other leadership position for residents at their institution. Institutions with existing chief resident programs had larger programs. Common duties of the chief resident included serving as a liaison between residents and the RPD (91.4%), coordinating resident meetings (87.1%), coordinating educational programming (45.2%), and managing residents' schedules (44.1%). RPDs indicated interest in training programs designed to develop management skills and enhance leadership potential (72.7%). Of those RPDs whose institutions did not off er a chief resident position, 22% expressed interest in developing such a position. Programs with four or more residents were more likely to be interested in developing a chief residency program than those with smaller programs (34.3% versus 13.2%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The majority of RPDs stated that their residency programs do not currently have a chief resident position. Programs with a greater number of pharmacy residents were more likely to have a current chief resident position or interest in establishing a chief resident position.     

Creating and Sustaining a Culture of Assessment

Accreditation standards require that colleges and schools of pharmacy establish and conduct ongoing assessment of their programs. A case study of the University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy's experience developing and implementing an assessment program is described. A historical perspective of the School, implementation of an office of education, and steps taken to establish a college culture of assessment are discussed. Successful aspects of the program, including student course/instructor evaluations and curriculum committee review of individual courses, are outlined. Finally, roadblocks encountered while establishing the assessment program and lessons learned that may benefit other schools currently in the process of developing an assessment program are discussed.     

Medical education about the care of addicted incarcerated persons: A national survey of residency programs

In June 1998, there were 1.8 million inmates in correctional facilities for adults; 1.2 million in state and federal prisons and 600,000 in municipal/county jails (668 persons per 100,000 U.S. population). Rates of TB, AIDS, mental illness, and substance abuse are 2–13 times higher in persons living in jails and prisons. This study was designed to assess the level of training offered to residents in seven medical specialties in the care of addicted incarcerated persons. The study design involved two stages. The first entailed a mailed survey to 1,831 residency directors in family medicine, internal medicine, osteopathic medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, psychiatry, and emergency medicine. The second stage was a telephone interview, about substance use disorders, of faculty listed by the residency directors as teaching residents. The mailed survey was completed by 1,205 residency directors (66%). The 769 faculty from those identified programs, who participated in the telephone interview, reported that only 14% of their residency programs offered lectures or conferences on the care of incarcerated persons, yet 44% of the programs had residents caring for incarcerated persons with substance abuse problems, in a clinical setting. Only 22% offered clinical experiences for residents in a correctional facility.

We recognize that our survey of correctional health and substance abuse training is limited, but as such, a greater number of respondents to our survey do not teach residents addiction medicine topics pertaining to prevention, evaluation, intervention, and management of the addicted criminal offender/patient in a correctional setting or give adequate clinical exposure to this special population. The data suggests a need to develop and implement educational programs on medical care for this high‐risk and expanding population.     

Meeting the modified drug information requirements of ASHP-accredited pharmacy practice residency programs.

The current standards for meeting drug information (DI) requirements in American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP)-accredited pharmacy practice residency (PPR) programs and the impact of changes in ASHP standards for the DI requirements were studied. In September 2002 a nine-question survey was e-mailed to the directors of all ASHP-accredited PPR programs listed with an available e-mail address on ASHP's residency directory Web page as of August 2002. The program directors were asked to provide information on the demographics of their practice settings, the current methods of completing the DI requirements of their programs, whether the DI requirements had changed between the 2001-02 and 2002-03 residency years, and whether any changes in the DI requirements were anticipated. A total of 178 (49%) of 365 PPR programs responded. Of the respondents, 87% were located in a hospital setting, 33% were affiliated with a school of pharmacy, and 40% had a formal onsite DI center. Half of the respondents fulfilled DI requirements through a longitudinal rotation, 20% through a block rotation, and 27% through both. Eighty-two percent of the respondents were familiar with the revised ASHP DI requirements, and 26% had modified their DI requirements between the 2001-02 and 2002-03 residency years. Seventeen percent anticipated changing their DI requirements in the future. Influences for modifications to the programs' DI requirements were mainly ASHP revisions and feedback from preceptors and residents. A national survey suggested that DI requirements in PPR programs are primarily achieved through a longitudinal rotation design.     

Training experiences of current and former community pharmacy residents, 1986-2000

OBJECTIVE: To identify why current and former community pharmacy residents chose a community pharmacy residency program (CPRP), what factors in the program were emphasized and not emphasized, what opportunities were available to them postresidency, and, for former residents, what skills learned during their residency have been most useful in their careers to date. DESIGN: Mail survey. PARTICIPANTS: 1999-2000 residents and former residents dating back to 1986. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reasons residents chose a CPRP over other residency or employment opportunities and respondents' ratings of the emphasis placed on a variety of skills and activities in their training programs. RESULTS: A total of 44 surveys were included in the final analysis, 18 (41%) of which were completed by 1999-2000 CPRP residents performing their residency at the time of the survey. The most common reasons for choosing a CPRP over other types of programs were opportunities for developing innovative services and direct patient interaction. Communication skills, clinical skills, and level of patient interaction were reported as being most highly emphasized. Management of the distribution system was most frequently cited as having "low" or "no" emphasis in their residency. Respondents listed marketing skills as the most common area requiring improvement or additional focus in their residency. Former residents cited leadership skills and the development of patient care services as the factors in their residency having the greatest impact on their careers to date. Postresidency opportunities most frequently sought included faculty, staff pharmacist, and clinical pharmacist positions. CONCLUSION: Candidates are drawn to CPRPs because of the opportunities such residencies offer to develop innovative services and provide direct patient care. Residents feel that many programs fail to provide adequate training in the areas of marketing services and obtaining reimbursement. Residency program directors should consider these findings when evaluating and marketing their programs.     

Recommendations for Aligning PGY2 Pharmacy Residency Training and Pharmacy Specialist Board Certification

With the increased focus and anticipated growth in specialty training and certification within the profession of pharmacy, it is important for the profession to step back and evaluate the manner in which its adopted education and certification systems interface. As a result of specialty practice development, significant growth is occurring in both postgraduate year two (PGY2) pharmacy residency programs and individuals seeking certification by the Board of Pharmacy Specialties. As the profession continues to evolve its specialty training and credentialing systems, it is important to consider the inherent relationship between these systems. This paper considers the current landscape of specialty training and certification, including issues related to the quality of PGY2 training, consistent application of standards across and within PGY2 programs, credentialing of preceptors and program directors, and alignment of training with specialty certification examination content domains. We outline recommendations across three areas: (1) creating consistency between specialty training and certification, (2) aligning qualifications of PGY2 residency program directors and preceptors with the designated specialty area, and (3) assessing program quality in the context of the expectations of specialists established by the profession. The goal of this paper is to stimulate professional dialogue on these issues. Establishing both formal and informal connections between specialty training and certification can serve as the foundation for a rational approach to professional development and the credentialing that will be recognized by stakeholders outside the pharmacy profession. Establishing these connections will also support and advance the profession's mission of meeting the medication needs of patients.     

Student pharmacists' perceptions of community pharmacy residency programs

ObjectivesTo compare penultimate-year (next-to-last) and final-year student pharmacists' perceptions of the educational value of community pharmacy residency programs (CPRPs) and to compare student pharmacists' perceptions of the educational value of CPRPs and health-system residency programs (HSRPs).MethodsA self-administered online survey was sent to administrators at 119 Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education–accredited schools of pharmacy for ultimate distribution to penultimate- and final-year student pharmacists. The survey included demographic measures and a 20-item residency program “perceived value of skill development” scale developed for this study.Results1,722 completed surveys were received and analyzed. Penultimate-year students attributed greater value to CPRPs more frequently than final-year students. Students more often attributed higher value to CPRPs for skills related to business management, practice management, and medication therapy management, while they attributed higher value to HSRPs for skills related to teaching, research, and clinical knowledge.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest students' perceived value of CPRPs may be related to their year of pharmacy school and the pharmacy practice skill in question.     

The First International Residency Program Accredited by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists

The processes by which the pharmacy residency program at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre-Riyadh, Saudi Arabia became the first American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) accredited program outside the United States is described. This article provides key points for a successful program for other pharmacy residency programs around the world. Additionally, it points out the need for establishing international standards for pharmacy residency programs.