Postgraduate training offered to primary care pharmacists by schools of pharmacy - changes over the last five years

Poster session - A review of the postgraduate training courses offered by the 15 schools of pharmacy within Britain was undertaken - The training currently on offer was compared with that offered by the same schools of pharmacy five years ago - It was found that although the numbers of training courses offered by the 15 schools had significantly increased, the orientation of the courses remained more or less as it was five years ago - The increases in the number of courses had not reflected the increased roles that pharmacists currently have and are hoping to undertake in the future - Any new training offered will need to reflect a wider “modernising and managing NHS organisations” agenda

An exploration of pharmacy-specific reasons for non-adherence to prescribed medicines in a socioeconomically deprived, ethnically diverse UK cohort

Methods - Ethical approval for the study was granted by both the local National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee (REC) and Aston University’s REC. Seven focus groups were conducted between October and December 2011 in medical or community settings within inner-city Birmingham (UK). Discussions were guided by a theme plan which was developed from key themes identified by a literature review and piloted via a Patient Consultation Group. Each focus group had between 3 and 7 participants. The groups were digitally recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim. The transcriptions were then subjected to thematic analysis via constant comparison in order to identify emerging themes. Results - Participants recognised the pharmacist as an expert source of advice about prescribed medicines, a source they frequently felt a need to consult as a result of the inadequate supply of medicines information from the prescriber. However, an emerging theme was a perception that pharmacists had an oblique profit motive relating to the supply of generic medicines with frequent changes to the ‘brand’ of generic supplied being attributed to profit-seeking by pharmacists. Such changes had a negative impact on the patient’s perceived efficacy of the therapy which may make non-adherence more likely. Conclusions - Whilst pharmacists were recognised as medicines experts, trust in the pharmacist was undermined by frequent changes to generic medicines. Such changes have the potential to adversely impact adherence levels. Further, quantitative research is recommended to examine if such views are generalisable to the wider population of Birmingham and to establish if such views impact on adherence levels.

Professionalism within pharmacy – the thoughts of Professional Leaders

To ascertain the thoughts of selected professional leaders on matters relating to pharmacist professionalism. These views will help build a picture of the professional status of pharmacy. Methods - Semi-structured interviews were conducted between July and November 2013 with representatives from eight UK pharmacy leadership bodies. The bodies were selected for their roles in pharmacy policy development, regulation and professional representation. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis by constant comparison identified a number of emerging themes. Results - The following emerging themes were identified from the interview data: Influence of the Pharmacy Landscape: Participants highlighted the role that pharmacy plays within the National Health Service and wider society and how future developments may affect the professional status currently afforded to pharmacists. Vocalising Pharmacy: Communication within the profession and also with those external to the profession, including other healthcare professionals and the general public, is important to ensure a high professional standing. The Impact of Commercialism: Professionalism and commercialism were generally seen to be antithetical and a rise in commercialism may adversely impact on external perceptions of the professionalism of pharmacy. Responsibility for Professionalism: The professional image of pharmacy is maintained by the individuals operating within it regardless of their scope of practice. It is the responsibility of all those individuals to ensure that they actively demonstrate ‘professional’ behaviours. The Journey to Professionalism: Acquiring a professional ethos is a continual process but there are stages in a pharmacist’s development that are considered particularly important. These include upbringing, undergraduate education and pre-registration training. Conclusions - Pharmacy’s professional status in the UK remains open to challenge and vital to retaining that status is the public perception of pharmacists. Future research examining pharmacy’s claims to professional status should focus on exploring the attitudes of the general public in addition to the views of pharmacists.

Improving the management of behaviour that challenges associated with dementia in care homes:protocol for pharmacy-health psychology intervention feasibility study

INTRODUCTION: The inappropriate use of antipsychotics in people with dementia for behaviour that challenges is associated with an estimated 1800 deaths annually. However, solely focusing on antipsychotics may transfer prescribing to other equally dangerous psychotropics. Little is known about the role of pharmacists in the management of psychotropics used to treat behaviours that challenge. This research aims to determine whether it is feasible to implement and measure the effectiveness of a combined pharmacy-health psychology intervention incorporating a medication review and staff training package to limit the prescription of psychotropics to manage behaviour that challenges in care home residents with dementia. METHODS/ANALYSIS: 6 care homes within the West Midlands will be recruited. People with dementia receiving medication for behaviour that challenges, or their personal consultee, will be approached regarding participation. Medication used to treat behaviour that challenges will be reviewed by the pharmacist, in collaboration with the general practitioner (GP), person with dementia and carer. The behavioural intervention consists of a training package for care home staff and GPs promoting person-centred care and treating behaviours that challenge as an expression of unmet need. The primary outcome measure is the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version (NPI-NH). Other outcomes include quality of life (EQ-5D and DEMQoL), cognition (sMMSE), health economic (CSRI) and prescribed medication including whether recommendations were implemented. Outcome data will be collected at 6 weeks, and 3 and 6 months. Pretraining and post-training interviews will explore stakeholders' expectations and experiences of the intervention. Data will be used to estimate the sample size for a definitive study. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The project has received a favourable opinion from the East Midlands REC (15/EM/3014). If potential participants lack capacity, a personal consultee will be consulted regarding participation in line with the Mental Capacity Act. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

‘Let’s talk about feedback’:an exploration of academic feedback practices in pharmacy education

Feedback is considered one of the most effective mechanisms to aid learning and achievement (Hattie and Timperley, 2007). However, in past UK National Student Surveys, perceptions of academic feedback have been consistently rated lower by final year undergraduate students than other aspects of the student experience (Williams and Kane, 2009). For pharmacy students in particular, Hall and colleagues recently reported that almost a third of students surveyed were dissatisfied with feedback and perceived feedback practice to be inconsistent (Hall et al, 2012). Aims of the Workshop: This workshop has been designed to explore current academic feedback practices in pharmacy education across a variety of settings and cultures as well as to create a toolkit for pharmacy academics to guide their approach to feedback. Learning Objectives: 1. Discuss and characterise academic feedback practices provided by pharmacy academics to pharmacy students in a variety of settings and cultures. 2. Develop academic feedback strategies for a variety of scenarios. 3. Evaluate and categorise feedback strategies with use of a feedback matrix. Description of Workshop Activities: Introduction to workshop and feedback on pre-reading exercise (5 minutes). Activity 1: A short presentation on theoretical models of academic feedback. Evidence of feedback in pharmacy education (10 minutes). Activity 2: Discussion of feedback approaches in participants’ organisations for differing educational modalities. Consideration of the following factors will be undertaken: experiential v. theoretical education, formative v. summative assessment, form of assessment and the effect of culture (20 minutes, large group discussion). Activity 3: Introduction of a feedback matrix (5 minutes). Activity 4: Development of an academic feedback toolkit for pharmacy education. Participants will be divided into 4 groups and will discuss how to provide effective feedback for 2 scenarios. Feedback strategies will be categorised with the feedback matrix. Results will be presented back to the workshop group (20 minutes, small group discussion, 20 minutes, large group presentation). Summary (10 minutes). Additional Information: Pre-reading: Participants will be provided with a list of definitions for academic feedback and will be asked to rank the definitions in order of perceived relevance to pharmacy education. References Archer, J. C. (2010). State of the science in health professional education: effective feedback. Medical education, 44(1), 101-108. Hall, M., Hanna, L. A., & Quinn, S. (2012). Pharmacy Students’ Views of Faculty Feedback on Academic Performance. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 76(1). Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112. Medina, M. S. (2007). Providing feedback to enhance pharmacy students’ performance. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 64(24), 2542-2545.

The PHAR-QA project: competency framework for pharmacy practice—first steps, the results of the European Network Delphi round 1

PHAR-QA, funded by the European Commission, is producing a framework of competences for pharmacy practice. The framework is in line with the EU directive on sectoral professions and takes into account the diversity of the pharmacy profession and the on-going changes in healthcare systems (with an increasingly important role for pharmacists), and in the pharmaceutical industry. PHAR-QA is asking academia, students and practicing pharmacists to rank competences required for practice. The results show that competences in the areas of drug interactions, need for drug treatment and provision of information and service were ranked highest whereas those in the areas of ability to design and conduct research and development and production of medicines were ranked lower. For the latter two categories, industrial pharmacists ranked them higher than did the other five groups

A European competence framework for industrial pharmacy practice in biotechnology

Project Report: The PHAR-IN ("Competences for industrial pharmacy practice in biotechnology") looked at whether there is a difference in how industrial employees and academics rank competences for practice in the biotechnological industry. A small expert panel consisting of the authors of this paper produced a biotechnology competence framework by drawing up an initial list of competences then ranking them in importance using a three-stage Delphi process. The framework was next evaluated and validated by a large expert panel of academics (n = 37) and industrial employees (n = 154). Results show that priorities for industrial employees and academics were similar. The competences for biotechnology practice that received the highest scores were mainly in: . "Research and Development", . "Upstream" and "Downstream" Processing', " . "Product development and formulation", " . "Aseptic processing", ."Analytical methodology", . "Product stability", and . "Regulation". The main area of disagreement was in the category "Ethics and drug safety" where academics ranked competences higher than did industrial employees.