Evolution of a capstone exam for third-year doctor of pharmacy students.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Pharmacy capstone exams are an example of an assessment strategy to evaluate student competency and practice-readiness. Capstone exam processes have been discussed in the literature; however, description of format, evolution of the process, and implementation in the year prior to rotations is lacking. This manuscript discusses the development, implementation, and utilization of a third professional year pharmacy capstone exam to assess advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) readiness. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: A pharmacy year three (PY3) capstone exam was initially developed prior to enrollment of the inaugural graduating class. Since the first iteration, utility has remained the same, but the overall development and implementation process has evolved due to changes in programmatic and student learning outcomes, curricular mapping, student and faculty feedback, and practice expectations. FINDINGS: The entities responsible for exam implementation perceive faculty and students have a positive perception of the exam evolution and improvements implemented. Specifically, feedback from students and faculty mentioned clear expectations, comfort with the new capstone exam process, and an appreciation for the focus on interrater reliability. As assessment is an iterative process, quality improvement strategies continue to be implemented to address feedback regarding the PY3 capstone exam. SUMMARY: Purposeful utilization of capstone exams in the third year is one method to assess APPE readiness. Sharing one college's experience with the evolution of such an exam, quality improvement methods, and experience in implementing reliability and validity measures may provide a model for institutions to implement similar assessment methods efficiently.

Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great.

Although the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Curriculum Quality Surveys (CQS) are required for programs to distribute and utilize as part of accreditation standards, programs face challenges in survey administration and timing, interpreting data and results, and following up on action plans. Because the CQS surveys are standardized, they can allow for greater comparison among institutions, yet interpretation of the items can vary considerably. Programs have flexibility in determining samples for administration and timing of administration (ie, number of years), but some participants (such as preceptors) can suffer from survey overload if multiple institutions administer in the same year. Determining thresholds for action and providing feedback to stakeholders on improvements made based on data triangulations can be daunting. These are a few of the elements that programs must consider when determining their own approach to the AACP CQS. Thus, the purpose of this Commentary is to describe good practices for using the AACP CQS, discuss challenges associated with the surveys, and recommend how to move the utilization of the surveys from good to great.

Collaborative drug therapy management and comprehensive medication management-2015.

The American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) previously published position statements on collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) in 1997 and 2003. Since 2003, significant federal and state legislation addressing CDTM has evolved and expanded throughout the United States. CDTM is well suited to facilitate the delivery of comprehensive medication management (CMM) by clinical pharmacists. CMM, defined by ACCP as a core component of the standards of practice for clinical pharmacists, is designed to optimize medication-related outcomes in collaborative practice environments. New models of care delivery emphasize patient-centered, team-based care and increasingly link payment to the achievement of positive economic, clinical, and humanistic outcomes. Hence clinical pharmacists practicing under CDTM agreements or through other privileging processes are well positioned to provide CMM. The economic value of clinical pharmacists in team-based settings is well documented. However, patient access to CMM remains limited due to lack of payer recognition of the value of clinical pharmacists in collaborative care settings and current health care payment policy. Therefore, the clinical pharmacy discipline must continue to establish and expand its use of CDTM agreements and other collaborative privileging mechanisms to provide CMM. Continued growth in the provision of CMM by appropriately qualified clinical pharmacists in collaborative practice settings will enhance recognition of their positive impact on medication-related outcomes.

Educational mentor program in a Web-based doctor of pharmacy degree pathway.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a successful educational mentor program for the Web-based doctor of pharmacy pathway at Creighton University, School of Pharmacy and Health Professions. DESIGN: A recruitment process was established and the educational mentor's responsibilities were identified. The roles of faculty instructors, the Office of Information Technology and Learning Resources, the Office of Faculty Development and Assessment, and Web-based Pharmacy Pathway Office as it pertains to the training of educational mentors were clearly delineated. An evaluation process for all key aspects of the program was also put in place. ASSESSMENT: Student, instructor, and mentor evaluations showed overall satisfaction with the program. Persistent areas of concern include the difficulty in motivating students to participate and/or engage in learning with the mentors. Many students remain unclear about mentors' roles and responsibilities. Lastly, in regards to mentors, there is a limited utilization of provided online resources. CONCLUSION: The educational mentor program has become an invaluable component of the Web pathway and has enhanced the interactions of students with the content and mentor.

Collaborative drug therapy management by pharmacists--2003.

Since publication of the initial ACCP position statement on CDTM by pharmacists in 1997, the public, government, and much of the health care community at large have come to better appreciate the growing complexity of providing effective and safe drug therapy in today's health care environment. Increased interest in the issues of cost and quality of drug use is evident in the increasing coverage of the issue in the lay press and professional literature. This represents real progress, as well as real opportunity, for pharmacists. It also heightens the potential for a better understanding of the vital role that pharmacists can play in addressing these concerns. The percentage of patients who take several drugs for chronic diseases will continue to increase. Based on current trends, the number of patients who lack adequate access to care, or who receive either suboptimal, inappropriate, or unnecessarily expensive drug therapy for their acute and chronic diseases, will increase. Even as financial and human resources are increasingly strained within the current health care system, costs will continue to rise unless changes are made. Fortunately, qualified pharmacists are prepared, capable, and willing to help address a significant portion of these challenges. The public, many health care providers, some legislators, and a few insurers now recognize that pharmacists, because of their education and training in drug therapy, are well positioned both to accept additional responsibility for patient care and to provide services that make a real difference in health care quality and outcomes. The health care programs administered by the U.S. Public Health Service, the armed forces, and the Veterans Health Administration, as well as 38 states, now support pharmacist participation in CDTM. Pharmacists, working in an interdisciplinary structure with physicians and other health care providers, have demonstrated that they can improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and safety of drug therapy by providing CDTM. It is time to incorporate this valuable professional skill of the contemporary pharmacist as a core component of the delivery of health care services.

Validity of cancer-related fatigue instruments.

Fatigue is one of the most debilitating and common symptoms associated with hematologic and oncologic disorders and treatment strategies. Patient factors influence etiology and symptom manifestation, which in turn affect diagnosis, management, and monitoring. Fatigue instruments can assist with the identification, management, and monitoring of this difficult and debilitating process. A variety of fatigue instruments have been developed, several of which have been validated in patients with cancer. Psychometric confirmation is difficult because of the diverse nature of cancer-related fatigue. Prospective, comparative, and combination analyses of the developed instruments are required to confirm validation and clarify use in practice.