Objectives. To describe current objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) practices in doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) programs in the United States. Methods. Structured interviews were conducted with PharmD faculty members between September 2008 and May 2010 to collect information about awareness of and interest in OSCE, current OSCE practices, and barriers to OSCEs. Results. Of 108 US colleges and schools of pharmacy identified, interviews were completed for a representative sample of 88 programs (81.5% participation rate). Thirty-two pharmacy programs reported using OSCEs; however, practices within these programs varied. Eleven of the programs consistently administered examinations of 3 or more stations, required all students to complete the same scenario(s), and had processes in place to ensure consistency of standardized patients' role portrayal. Of the 55 programs not using OSCEs, approximately half were interested in using the technique. Common barriers to OSCE implementation or expansion were cost and faculty members' workloads.Conclusions. There is wide interest in using OSCEs within pharmacy education. However, few colleges and schools of pharmacy conduct OSCEs in an optimal manner, and most do not adhere to best practices in OSCE construction and administration.

Objective. To assess the relationship between readiness for self-directed learning, academic performance on self-directed learning activities, and resources used to prepare for an abilities laboratory course. Methods. The Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) was administered to first-year (P1) doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) candidates at the University of Maryland. Additional data collected included final course grades, quiz scores, resources used to prepare for laboratory activities, and demographics.Results. The mean SDLRS score was 148.6 6 13.8. Sixty-eight students (44%) scored . 150, indicating a high readiness for self-directed learning. These students were more likely to complete assignments before the laboratory, meet in study groups, and report postgraduation plans to enter noncommunity pharmacy. No significant association was found between academic performance and the SDLRS. Conclusions. Readiness for self-directed learning is associated with self-directed learning habits, but may not be necessary for learning foundational knowledge, provided students are given specific instructions on what to study. Whether high readiness for self-directed learning is necessary for more complex learning or for self-identification of learning needs is unknown.

Systematic reviews have provided some insight into the impact of interprofessional collaborative practice on patient outcomes. Despite strong interest in interprofessional collaborative practice, relatively little is known about its impact in primary care settings. This scoping literature review describes the essential elements of an interprofessional primary care practice and explores what is known about its impact on patient care including clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes. We completed a review of the literature examining the breadth of knowledge related to interprofessional collaborative practice in primary care settings. A search was conducted to identify studies based on predefined criteria. A total of 51 studies met the criteria. A total of 27 studies reported a significantly positive clinical outcome with the interprofessional collaborative practice model, 27 studies reported no difference, and one study reported negative outcome in mortality. A total of 15 studies reported a significantly positive humanistic outcome. There was little to no difference in economic outcomes. This study provides new insights for future research that examines the impact of interprofessional primary care practice.

No abstract

Objective. To evaluate the impact of advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs) on doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) students' readiness for self-directed learning. Methods. The Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) was administered to students prior to and after completing their APPEs. SDLRS is a validated instrument that determines the relative degree to which students have the attitudes and motivation to engage in self-directed learning.Results. Seventy-seven (64%) students completed the SDLRS prior to starting their APPEs and 80 (67%) students completed the instrument after completing their APPEs. Forty-six (38%) students completed both. Prior to starting their APPEs, 74% of students scored greater than 150 on the SDLRS, indicating a high level of readiness for self-directed learning. No significant difference was found between the mean scores of students who took the SDLRS both prior to (159 6 20) and after completing their APPEs (159 6 24; p . 0.05). Conclusion. Students at our institution appear to be ready for self-directed learning but APPEs had a minimal impact on their readiness for self-directed learning.

No abstract

Board certification is a means of demonstrating expertise above the minimum licensing standards. For many health care professionals, this credential is a necessity. As pharmacists become involved in more advanced patient care services, board certification becomes an essential component to ensuring quality care. The prevalence of United States pharmacy practice faculty members who are board certified, however, is unknown. In addition, to our knowledge, factors that serve to motivate or discourage faculty from obtaining board certification have not been previously described; thus, 900 pharmacy practice faculty members listed in the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) online directory were invited to complete an online survey regarding motivators and barriers for board certification. In addition, a list of board-certified pharmacists, obtained from the Board of Pharmacy Specialties, was used to check the board certification status of all pharmacy practice faculty members listed in the AACP directory. In 2011, the prevalence of board certification among the 2867 pharmacy practice faculty members was 37% (1063 pharmacists), with the highest prevalence found among assistant professors (39.4%). A total of 322 faculty members (36% response rate) completed the survey; of these, 308 self-identified as pharmacy practice faculty, and their responses were included in the analysis. Current board certification in pharmacy specialties was reported by 163 respondents (52.9%); 14 (4.5%) were previously certified. Among the 308 respondents, the most common perceived reason why pharmacy practice faculty become board certified was the desire to be recognized as an expert in the field (71.5%). Those who were currently board certified indicated personal growth as the most important reason (60.1%). Those previously certified indicated no perceived benefit as the most common reason for not recertifying (71.4%). Among those never certified, no perceived need (52.0%) or benefit (44.8%) were the most common reasons for not becoming certified; however, a majority of those never certified (68%) stated that they would become board certified if there was no associated cost and they were confident they would pass. To increase the prevalence of board certification in pharmacy practice faculty at U.S. schools and colleges of pharmacy, the benefits of this credential must be addressed at each institution. Steps should be taken to assist and encourage board certification.

Prophylactic HPV vaccines safely and effectively prevent HPV infection and precancerous lesions in the cervix. The availability of these vaccines also create new clinical opportunities for community pharmacists, provided needed legal, regulatory, and policy changes are made.