Perceptions of a virtual interview process for pharmacy residents during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multisite survey of residency candidates, preceptors, and residency program directors.

PURPOSE: To describe the perceptions of residency candidates, residency practitioners (current residents and preceptors), and residency program directors (RPDs) regarding a virtual interview process for pharmacy residency programs across multiple institutions. METHODS: In May 2021, an anonymous web-based questionnaire characterizing perceptions of the virtual interview process used during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was distributed to residency candidates, residency practitioners, and RPDs across 13 institutions. Quantitative responses measured on a 5-point Likert scale were summarized with descriptive statistics, and open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic qualitative methods. RESULTS: 236 residency candidates and 253 residency practitioners/RPDs completed the questionnaire, yielding response rates of 27.8% (236 of 848), and 38.1% (253 of 663), respectively. Overall, both groups perceived the virtual interview format positively. When asked whether virtual interviews should replace in-person interviews moving forward, 60.0% (18 of 30) of RPDs indicated they agreed or strongly agreed, whereas only 30.5% (61 of 200) of current preceptors/residents and 28.7% (66 of 230) of residency candidates agreed or strongly agreed. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses revealed that while virtual interviews were easier logistically, the lack of in-person interactions was a common concern for many stakeholders. Lastly, the majority (65.0%) of residency candidates reported greater than $1,000 in savings with virtual interviews. CONCLUSION: Virtual interviews offered logistical and financial benefits. The majority of RPDs were in favor of offering virtual interviews to replace in-person interviews, whereas the majority of residency candidates and practitioners preferred on-site interviews. As restrictions persist with the ongoing pandemic, our results provide insight into best practices for virtual pharmacy residency interviews.

Relation of apixaban bleeding rates to dose in patients with chronic kidney disease.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of apixaban 5 mg twice daily vs 2.5 mg twice daily for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism in patients with chronic kidney disease stage 4 and 5, including those on hemodialysis. Data were collected retrospectively on patients with advanced chronic kidney disease and nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and/or venous thromboembolism who received apixaban while hospitalized at our institution between January 2013 and August 2018. The 5 mg twice daily group included 22 patients, and the 2.5 mg twice daily group included 73 patients. There was no difference between groups in major bleeding events (9.1% vs. 12.3%, P = 1.00), any bleeding event (45.4% vs. 67.1%, P = 0.08), ischemic stroke (0% vs. 2.7%, P = 1.00), or venous thromboembolism (4.5% vs. 0%, P = 0.23). Subgroup analyses of patients with a serum creatinine >2.5 mg/dL or creatinine clearance <25 mL/min and patients on hemodialysis produced similar results. Until larger trials are conducted, clinicians should make patient-specific decisions about the optimal dose of apixaban in patients with severe renal impairment.