An Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework for Australia

The need to develop An Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework for Australia (the “APPF”) was identified during the 2010 review of the competency standards for Australian pharmacists. The Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework Steering Committee, a collaborative profession-wide committee comprised of representatives of ten pharmacy organisations, examined and adapted existing advanced practice frameworks, all of which were found to have been based on the Competency Development and Evaluation Group (CoDEG) Advanced and Consultant Level Framework (the “CoDEG Framework”) from the United Kingdom. Its competency standards were also found to align well with the Domains of the National Competency Standards Framework for Pharmacists in Australia (the “National Framework”). Adaptation of the CoDEG Framework created an APPF that is complementary to the National Framework, sufficiently flexible to customise for recognising advanced practice in any area of professional practice and has been approved by the boards/councils of all participating organisations. The primary purpose of the APPF is to assist the development of the profession to meet the changing health care needs of the community. However, it is also a valuable tool for assuring members of the public of the competence of an advanced practice pharmacist and the quality and safety of the services they deliver.

Australian pharmacists' self-perceptions in relation to the 'Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework'

Background The Australian Pharmacy Practice Framework was developed by the Advanced Pharmacy Practice Steering Committee and endorsed by the Pharmacy Board of Australia in October 2012. The Steering Committee conducted a study that found practice portfolios to be the preferred method to assess and credential Advanced Pharmacy Practitioner, which is currently being piloted by the Australian Pharmacy Council. Credentialing is predicted to open to all pharmacists practising in Australia by November 2015. Objective To explore how Australian pharmacists self-perceived being advanced in practice and how they related their level of practice to the Australian Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework. Method This was an explorative, cross-sectional study with mixed methods analysis. Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework, a review of the recent explorative study on Advanced Practice conducted by the Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework Steering Committee and semi-structured interviews (n = 10) were utilized to create, refine and pilot the questionnaire. The questionnaire was advertised across pharmacy-organizational websites via a purposive sampling method. The target population were pharmacists currently registered in Australia. Results Seventy-two participants responded to the questionnaire. The participants were mostly female (56.9%) and in the 30–40 age group (26.4%). The pharmacists self-perceived their levels of practice as either entry, transition, consolidation or advanced, with the majority selecting the consolidation level (38.9%). Although nearly half (43.1%) of the participants had not seen the Framework beforehand, they defined Advanced Pharmacy Practice similarly to the definition outlined in the Framework, but also added specialization as a requirement. Pharmacists explained why they were practising at their level of practice, stating that not having more years of practice, lacking experience, or postgraduate/post-registration qualifications, and more involvement and recognition in practice were the main reasons for not considering themselves as an Advanced Pharmacy Practitioner. To be considered advanced by the Framework, pharmacists would need to fulfill at least 70% of the Advanced Practice competency standards at an advanced level. More than half of the pharmacists (64.7%) that self-perceived as being advanced managed to fulfill 70% or more of these Advanced Practice competency standards at the advanced level. However, none of the self-perceived entry level pharmacists managed to match at least 70% of the competencies at the entry level. Conclusion Participants' self-perception of the term Advanced Practice was similar to the definition in the Advanced Pharmacy Practice Framework. Pharmacists working at an advanced level were largely able to demonstrate and justify their reasons for being advanced practitioners. However, pharmacists practising at the other levels of practice (entry, transition, consolidation) require further guidance regarding their advancement in practice.

Developing a Best Management Practice guideline for the Australian Banana Industry

Demonstrating environmental performance and sustainability is a strategic priority for the Australian banana industry. Development, delivery and uptake of an EMS will allow the industry to demonstrate this. It will maintain community confidence in the Australian banana industry and its commitment to careful environmental management and the protection of key Australian icons like the Great Barrier Reef and the Wet Tropics and ensure the industry’s right to farm, now and in the future.

Feedback and clinical practice improvement: A tool to assist workplace supervisors and students

In work integrated learning, students may report difficulties applying theory learned at university to clinical practice. One contributing factor may be students' inability to engage in meaningful reflection and self-correcting behaviours. This paper reports the evaluation of a tool, process and resources developed to assist students to reflect on feedback and engage in self-assessment. Students were assisted to develop self-assessment skills by reflecting on, and engaging with feedback from previous workplace experiences to develop goals, learning outcomes and strategies to improve performance with mostly positive results. A secondary aim was to identify common learning strategies or barriers that impacted on student outcomes. Four themes emerged from the qualitative data: 1) preparing for clinical learning; 2) relationships and engagement levels; 3) shared awareness, and; 4) developing clinical practice. Overall students felt the tool assisted them to narrow their attention on what needed to be improved. While supervisors believed the tool helped them to focus on specific needs of each student. Common barriers to clinical practice improvement related to a lack of opportunity in some settings, and lack of staff willingness to support students to achieve identified goals. Students and supervisors found the use of the tools beneficial and assisted students to demonstrate a greater understanding of how to apply feedback received to support their learning in the clinical environment.