Changes in student pharmacists' confidence in attaining geriatrics competencies and attitudes toward older adults across the Doctor of Pharmacy curriculum.

To determine if student pharmacists' confidence in their knowledge and skills, and their attitudes toward older adults improved throughout pharmacy school with an integrated geriatrics didactic curriculum (years 1-3) and a final year of clinical training including a required advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) in geriatrics (year 4). A two-part voluntary anonymous survey was administered at three different time points to two large cohorts of student pharmacists. The first part of the survey assessed students' confidence in attaining geriatrics competencies. The second part of the survey used the UCLA Geriatrics Attitudes Scale to assess students' attitudes. Of the 286 students who were emailed the survey, 236 student pharmacists completed it at the first assessment. Student pharmacists showed an increase in confidence in achieving geriatrics competencies from their first year to their third year, and further increase after their clinical training. Most students also held a generally positive attitude toward older adults from P1 to P4 year. Integration of geriatrics throughout the didactic and experiential curriculum made an impact on student pharmacists' confidence in their competency toward caring for older adults, while maintaining a positive attitude toward older adults throughout pharmacy school.

A Laboratory Session to Prepare Pharmacy Students to Manage the Opioid Crisis Situation.

Objective. To educate third-year pharmacy students about the role of pharmacists in the opioid crisis and measure their knowledge, confidence, and attitudes towards opioids and opioid overdose. Methods. All third-year students (n=130) enrolled in a Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) degree program participated in opioid overdose and naloxone education and training followed by a three-part laboratory session that included mock naloxone counseling, case-based discussion of the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), and equianalgesic opioid dose conversion scenarios. A pre- and post-assessment focused on the individual's clinical knowledge, confidence, and attitudes about opioid overdose management and naloxone use was administered before and after the laboratory session to evaluate the student's baseline understanding and experience compared to learning gains from the session. An evaluation of the laboratory session was also conducted. Results. Upon completion, 99% percent of students rated the opioid laboratory as excellent (59%) or good (40%). Students believed the laboratory was stimulating (93%), relevant to pharmacy practice (96%), and contributed to their professional development (97%), and that the information provided was at an appropriate level (98%). Knowledge-based assessments improved in the areas of PDMP timely reporting, differentiating between naloxone devices, and naloxone administration technique. Student attitudes toward managing opioid overdoses improved on a majority of items. The majority of students agreed they had enough information to help them manage an opioid overdose (88.5%) and denied the need for additional training (61.5%). Conclusion. An active-learning laboratory helped to improve pharmacy students' knowledge, confidence, and attitudes with regard to opioids and the use of naloxone to treat a patient who has overdosed.

Implementation of an Active-Learning Laboratory on Pharmacogenetics.

Objective. To evaluate students' knowledge, confidence, and skills after implementation of an active-learning laboratory session in clinical pharmacogenetics. Methods. Third-year pharmacy students (n=130) participated in an active-learning laboratory session on pharmacogenetics. In the laboratory activity, students evaluated patients' pharmacogenetic profiles and documented recommendations to providers based on their findings. Students also counseled a simulated patient on the interpretation of their pharmacogenetic profile. Students' knowledge and confidence were assessed before a lecture on clinical pharmacogenetics, after the lecture, and then after the laboratory activity. The assessment included 10 knowledge-based questions and five confidence questions regarding clinical pharmacogenetics. An evaluation of the laboratory activity was completed after the session. Results. On average, students correctly answered 70.3% of the knowledge-based questions before the lecture, 82.8% after the lecture, and 88.7% after the laboratory session. Additionally, students' confidence improved in each of the five areas assessed. Based on evaluations (response rate: 98.5%), students found that the laboratory activity contributed to their professional development, was taught at an appropriate level for their understanding, and was relevant to pharmacy practice. Conclusion. An active-learning laboratory session to teach pharmacy students about clinical pharmacogenetics improved students' knowledge, confidence, and skills.