Comparison of Drug Information Practice Curriculum Components in US Colleges of Pharmacy

2005 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina W. Cole ◽  
Nannette M. Berensen
2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob P. Gettig ◽  
Joseph K. Jordan ◽  
Amy Heck Sheehan

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the current perceptions of drug information practice and training. Methods Electronic surveys were sent to 417 pharmacists who likely would have drug information responsibilities. The survey collected information regarding job responsibilities, perceived importance of each responsibility to drug information practice, type of postgraduate training received to prepare for responsibilities, and perceived adequacy of training. Results There were 206 survey respondents. The most frequently cited primary job responsibilities were providing instruction to students and staff, operating drug information centers, and responding to drug information queries. Most respondents felt that educational instruction, pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee support, and responding to drug information questions were very important to drug information practice. On-the-job experience was cited as the most frequent source of training. Of the respondents, 46% reported completion of a pharmacy practice residency and 40% reported completion of a drug information specialty residency, with 14% completing both. Fifteen percent of respondents had no postgraduate training. Most respondents felt prepared for current job responsibilities after postgraduate training, with the exceptions of information systems support, pharmacoeconomic evaluations, and clinical outcomes research. Conclusion Despite earlier recommendations, drug information job responsibilities within the study sample have changed little over the past decade. Respondents felt that most of their job responsibilities are important to drug information practice and that postgraduate training adequately prepared them for most of these responsibilities. However, only 40% of respondents received specialized training in drug information practice.


1989 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha M. Rumore ◽  
Jack M. Rosenberg

1993 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 634-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Rovers ◽  
John E. Janosik ◽  
Paul F. Souney

OBJECTIVE: To compare Dialog EMBASE with the National Library of Medicine's (NLM's) MEDLARS MEDLINE, TOXLINE, and TOXLIT to evaluate differences among the databases and vendors in a method consistent with routine drug information practice. DESIGN: Crossover comparison. METHODS: NLM MEDLARS databases MEDLINE, TOXLINE, and TOXLIT were searched directly. EMBASE was searched via Dialog Information Services. MEDLINE was searched back to 1980; TOXLINE and TOXLIT were searched back to 1981, reflecting the different database structures. EMBASE was searched back to 1980. To control bias, searches were randomized; identical strategies were used during the same session and were performed by the same trained searcher. RESULTS: Twenty-six drug information requests were compared. The MEDLARS and Dialog databases were generally similar, with no significant differences in the number of potentially relevant references, English references, clinically relevant references, available abstracts, unique citations, time online, and number of questions answered. EMBASE searches were more costly (p=0.0005). TOXLIT was costlier than TOXLINE and MEDLINE (p=0.0018). CONCLUSIONS: NLM MEDLARS databases were comparable to Dialog EMBASE. Although MEDLARS provided more total and English-language citations, the differences were small and did not influence the proportion of questions answered. The greatest difference between the vendors was the significantly lower cost of searching on MEDLARS. Although this difference may be partially offset by the significantly shorter search times on EMBASE, the mean 1.9 minutes saved would not recoup the mean $7.89 difference in cost. MEDLARS databases are less expensive for routine drug information requests.


1996 ◽  
Vol 30 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 876-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon J Vanscoy ◽  
Lidia K Gajewski ◽  
Linda S Tyler ◽  
Mary Lea Gora-Harper ◽  
Kathy L Grant ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the current practice of drug information and develop a strategic plan for a “valued” specialty of medication information practice. DATA SOURCES: The Consortium for the Advancement of Medication Information, Policy, and Research (CAMIPR) met in June 1994 to initiate a strategic plan for a future of medication information practice. A multidimensional situation analysis and strategic planning process was conducted and the results are discussed. RECOMMENDATIONS: Trends in health care (e.g., healthcare reform, managed care) will impact the future of medication information practice, and the medication information specialist must evolve with society's values. Medication information practice must transform and attention will likely focus on medication policy research/ development and information systems. However, new skills, resources, and relationships must be developed to facilitate this evolution. In addition, interest in the practice of drug information has declined. Strategies are presented to enhance the “value” and “image” of future medication information practice.


1983 ◽  
Vol 22 (03) ◽  
pp. 135-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Kitaguchi ◽  
T. Nojiri ◽  
S. Suzuki ◽  
T. Fukita ◽  
T. Kawana

In order to meet the multifarious needs for drug information and to cope with the post-marketing surveillance of drugs adequately, an on-line drug information network, which is composed of two data bases, clinical case record data base and literature data base, has been developed. Primary considerations in designing these systems were input of clean data, accurate input, insuring that no ADRs are overlooked, accumulation of the latest data, saving manpower required for processing, and processing large quantities of data. This system is also designed to input and to output in Japanese character.


2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 497-503
Author(s):  
Yousef Ahmed Alomi ◽  
Saeed Jamaan Alghamdi ◽  
Radi Abdullah Alattyh

Objective: To explore the National Survey of Drug Information Centers practice in Saudi Arabia: Leadership and Practice management at Ministry of Health hospital. Method: It is a cross-sectional four months national survey of Drug Information Services at Ministry of Health hospital. It contained ten domains with 181 questions designed by the authors. It was derived from Internal Pharmaceutical Federation, American Society of Health-System Pharmacists best practice guidelines. This survey was distributed to forty hospital pharmacies that run drug information services. In this study, domain of Drug Monitoring and Patient Counselling System explored and analyzed. It consisted of eight questions about the written policy and procedure and application methods for Leadership and Practice management in the drug information centers. All analysis was done through survey monkey system. Results: The survey distributed to 45 of hospitals, the response rate, was 40 (88.88%) hospitals. The highest score of the DIC had policy and procedures with a clear mission, vision, and values were Evidence of valid Saudi Council of Health Specialties license to practice in Saudi Arabia did not exist in 3 (7.5%) hospitals while 30 (75%) of hospitals 100% applied the elements. The highest score of the Drug information centers had a space, adequate furniture, hours of operation were determined and announced as well as there was a qualified and licensed staffing. All Drug Information Centers staff had valid licenses from Saudi Commission for Health Specialties to practice in Saudi Arabia, did not exist in 6 (15%) hospitals while 30 (75%) of hospitals 100% applied the elements. The highest score of the Drug Information Centers Supervisor, reports workload statistics to the appropriate and leadership number of Full Time Employee staff and actual workload published was the answering question depends on the priority of the question did not exist in 6 (15%) hospitals while only 22 (55%) of hospitals 100% applied the elements. The highest score of the Drug Information Centers showed evidence of Quality Improvement, and the process for Drug Information Centers Networking. The reporting any questionable drug quality to Pharmacy director, did not exist in 4 (10 %) hospitals while only 25 (62.5%) of hospitals 100% applied the elements. Conclusion: There were an acceptable implementation leadership and practice management in drug information centers practice. The drug information centers workload analysis and quality management should improve. Drug information centers network indication required an implementation to improve the services at Ministry of Health hospital in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-249
Author(s):  
Satrio Wibowo Rahmatullah ◽  
◽  
Ika Maulida Nurrahma ◽  
Adnan Syahrizal

Compliance to achieve treatment success can be improved by providing drug information services (PIO) and counseling to improve understanding of treatment instructions. The general objective of this study was to determine the effect of drug information service and counseling on the level of medication adherence in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) with hypertension in the Banjarbaru Regional Hospital. This study uses a quasi experimental method with a cross sectional approach and takes patient data prospectively. The results of this study indicate that the group given PIO and counseling showed a high level of adherence as many as 20 respondents (100%). Whereas in the group that was not given PIO and the counseling level of adherence was low, there were 4 respondents (20%). Based on the mann-whitney analysis p-value = 0,000 (<α = 0.05) so that there are differences in the group with PIO and counseling with groups without PIO and counseling, while the chi square analysis p-value = 0.004 (<α = 0 , 05) so that PIO and counseling have a significant effect on the level of adherence to taking medication in patients with DM with hypertension at the Banjarbaru Regional Hospital.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document