RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To implement a 5-week advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) in community engagement and assess the impact of the APPE on students' confidence and ability to provide community-based services. DESIGN: Working with community partners, students provided medication reconciliation, attended interprofessional healthcare meetings, developed health-promotion activities, and conducted medication-therapy reviews. ASSESSMENT: Responses to pre- and post-APPE 10-item surveys, preceptor and practice-experience evaluations, and the documented number of pharmacy student recommendations were determined. CONCLUSION: This APPE provides students opportunities in nontraditional community settings to increase their confidence and enhance their skills in health-promotion activities, medication-therapy management, and interprofessional care of patients, all of which are essential to the practice of pharmacy.
Asunto(s)
Servicios Comunitarios de Farmacia/organización & administración , Educación en Farmacia/métodos , Estudiantes de Farmacia/psicología , Competencia Clínica , Educación Basada en Competencias , Curriculum , Evaluación Educacional , Promoción de la Salud/métodos , Humanos , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico/educación , Atención al Paciente/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To identify the prevalence of portfolio use in US pharmacy programs, common components of portfolios, and advantages of and limitations to using portfolios. METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey instrument was sent to experiential coordinators at US colleges and schools of pharmacy to collect data on portfolio content, methods, training and resource requirements, and benefits and challenges of portfolio use. RESULTS: Most colleges and schools of pharmacy (61.8%) use portfolios in experiential courses and the majority (67.1%) formally assess them, but there is wide variation regarding content and assessment. The majority of respondents used student portfolios as a formative evaluation primarily in the experiential curriculum. CONCLUSIONS: Although most colleges and schools of pharmacy have a portfolio system in place, few are using them to fulfill accreditation requirements. Colleges and schools need to carefully examine the intended purpose of their portfolio system and follow-through with implementation and maintenance of a system that meets their goals.
Asunto(s)
Educación en Farmacia/organización & administración , Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas/organización & administración , Facultades de Farmacia/organización & administración , Estudiantes de Farmacia , Enseñanza/organización & administración , Acreditación , Estudios Transversales , Educación en Farmacia/normas , Evaluación Educacional , Humanos , Internet , Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas/normas , Facultades de Farmacia/normas , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Enseñanza/normas , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To implement and assess a medication therapy management (MTM) training program for pharmacy students using the MirixaPro (Mirixa Corporation, Reston, VA) platform and case studies. DESIGN: Students received lectures introducing MTM and were given a demonstration of the MirixaPro platform. They were divided into teams and assigned cases and times to interview patients portrayed by faculty members. Using the MirixaPro system, students performed 2 comprehensive medication reviews during the semester, recording the patient's current medications, indications, side effects, allergies, health conditions, and laboratory test recommendations and developed a personal medication record and medication action plan. ASSESSMENT: Based on a rubric with a rating scale of 0-10, campus and distance pathway students received mean scores ranging from 6.3-7.4 for their performance on the second MTM exercise, an increase of 47%-54% over the first MTM exercise. In qualitative assessments, the majority of students believed that their confidence in providing MTM was enhanced by the activity, while faculty members recognized the advantage of using MirixaPro, which allowed students to experience what is required in processing a pharmacist led, billable MTM encounter. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the MirixaPro system and patient cases provides students with a "hands-on" experience that may encourage them to promote MTM during their APPEs and provide MTM services as practicing pharmacists.
Asunto(s)
Educación en Farmacia/métodos , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico/educación , Estudiantes de Farmacia , Instrucción por Computador/métodos , Evaluación Educacional , Humanos , Internet , Servicios Farmacéuticos/organización & administración , Farmacéuticos/organización & administración , Rol ProfesionalRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance of campus-based students with that of distance students during the first 2 years of a doctor of pharmacy program to evaluate parity between the pathways. METHODS: Twelve cases were created for each year of the program along with performance criteria. The cases were converted into computer-based simulations for programmatic assessment at the end of the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 school years. All first-professional year (P1) and second-professional year (P2) students participated in the assessments. Overall class means were calculated and used to compare student performances between campus and distance education pathways. RESULTS: Overall scores for the 2003 P1 class were 56.4% for the campus-based students and 62.4% for the distance students, (p = 0.002); overall scores for the 2003 P2 class were 48.8% and 55.5%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The 2004 overall scores for P1 campus and distance students were 59.0% and 65.7%, respectively, (p = 0.001); and for 2004 P2 scores the results were 51.8% and 56.5%, respectively (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Students receiving their pharmacy education via a distance pathway scored higher on performance-based assessments compared with students receiving their pharmacy education via the traditional campus-based pathway. This indicates that distance students are receiving at least an equivalent curricular experience in the P1 and P2 years compared to that received by campus-based students.