A framework for assessing continuing professional development activities for satisfying pharmacy revalidation requirements

The United Kingdom’s pharmacy regulator contemplated using continuing professional development (CPD) in pharmacy revalidation in 2009, simultaneously asking pharmacy professionals to demonstrate the value of their CPD by showing its relevance and impact. The idea of linking new CPD requirements with revalidation was yet to be explored. Our aim was to develop and validate a framework to guide pharmacy professionals to select CPD activities that are relevant to their work and to produce a score sheet that would make it possible to quantify the impact and relevance of CPD. METHODS: We adapted an existing risk matrix, producing a CPD framework consisting of relevance and impact matrices. Concepts underpinning the framework were refined through feedback from five pharmacist teacher-practitioners. We then asked seven pharmacists to rate the relevance of the framework’s individual elements on a 4-point scale to determine content validity. We explored views about the framework through focus groups with six and interviews with 17 participants who had used it formally in a study. RESULTS: The framework’s content validity index was 0.91. Feedback about the framework related to three themes of penetrability of the framework, usefulness to completion of CPD, and advancement of CPD records for the purpose of revalidation. DISCUSSION: The framework can help professionals better select CPD activities prospectively, and makes assessment of CPD more objective by allowing quantification, which could be helpful for revalidation. We believe the framework could potentially help other health professionals with better management of their CPD irrespective of their field of practice.

Messages about antibiotic resistance in different newspaper genres

Poorer people are more likely to use antibiotics; inappropriate antibiotic use causes resistance, and health campaigns attempt to change behaviour through education. However, fuelled by the media, the public think antibiotic resistance is outside their control. Differences in the attribution of blame for antibiotic resistance in two genres of UK newspapers, targeting distinct socioeconomic groups, were examined using a mixed methods approach. Firstly, depiction of blame was categorised as either external to the lay public (outside their control) or internal (lay person accountable) and subjected to a chi-square test. Secondly, using critical discourse analysis, we examined the portrayal of the main agents through newspaper language. Data from 597 articles (307 broadsheets) analysed revealed a significant association between newspaper genre and attribution of blame for antibiotic resistance. While both newspaper types blamed antibiotic resistance predominantly on factors external to the lay public, broadsheets were more likely to acknowledge internal factors than tabloids. Tabloids provided a more skewed representation, exposing readers to inaccurate explanations about antibiotic resistance. They highlighted ineptitude in health professionals, victimising patients and blaming others, while broadsheets used less emotive language. Pharmacists should take special care to communicate the importance of appropriate antibiotic use against this backdrop of distortion.