Inter-professional prescription safety workshop for non-medical prescribing and pharmacy students: A cross-sectional study.

S. Hemingway, M. Culshaw, J. Stephenson
{"title":"Inter-professional prescription safety workshop for non-medical prescribing and pharmacy students: A cross-sectional study.","authors":"S. Hemingway, M. Culshaw, J. Stephenson","doi":"10.5920/bjpharm.659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reports on an evaluation of a prescribing workshop to increase ‘sharedlearning’ between registered practitioners undertaking a non-medicalprescribing (NMP) course (midwifery, nursing, physiotherapy, and podiatry) andundergraduate pharmacy students to increase awareness of, and understanding of theroles.  The focus was on three domains ofsafe prescribing: Knowledge (of commonly prescribed medicines and theirsuitability for individual patients); Process (of legal requirements and supplyof medicines and associated patient information); and Relationships (betweenprescribers and pharmacists). A cross-sectional evaluation was utilized with6-point Likert-style items and a free text section, completed by 337participants.  Participants reported positivelyabout the workshop content and their learning experience, although somedifferences between pharmacy and NMP participants were noted in the knowledgedomain. Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences (p<0.001) oflow-to-moderate magnitude (partial-2=0.146) between NMP and Pharmacy studenton all 3 domains, with NMP students reporting slightly more positive outcomes(between 0.4 and 1.5 points higher) in all cases. However, both groups scoredpositively; with mean domain scores of 15.6 to 16.5 on scales with maximumscores of 18.","PeriodicalId":9253,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Pharmacy","volume":"58 2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5920/bjpharm.659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This article reports on an evaluation of a prescribing workshop to increase ‘sharedlearning’ between registered practitioners undertaking a non-medicalprescribing (NMP) course (midwifery, nursing, physiotherapy, and podiatry) andundergraduate pharmacy students to increase awareness of, and understanding of theroles.  The focus was on three domains ofsafe prescribing: Knowledge (of commonly prescribed medicines and theirsuitability for individual patients); Process (of legal requirements and supplyof medicines and associated patient information); and Relationships (betweenprescribers and pharmacists). A cross-sectional evaluation was utilized with6-point Likert-style items and a free text section, completed by 337participants.  Participants reported positivelyabout the workshop content and their learning experience, although somedifferences between pharmacy and NMP participants were noted in the knowledgedomain. Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences (p<0.001) oflow-to-moderate magnitude (partial-2=0.146) between NMP and Pharmacy studenton all 3 domains, with NMP students reporting slightly more positive outcomes(between 0.4 and 1.5 points higher) in all cases. However, both groups scoredpositively; with mean domain scores of 15.6 to 16.5 on scales with maximumscores of 18.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非医疗处方和药学学生跨专业处方安全研讨会:一项横断面研究。
本文报告了一个处方研讨会的评估,以增加参加非医疗处方(NMP)课程(助产学,护理学,物理治疗和足病)的注册从业者和本科药学学生之间的“共享学习”,以提高对角色的认识和理解。重点是安全处方的三个领域:知识(常用处方药及其对个体患者的适用性);流程(法律要求和药品供应以及相关患者信息);以及关系(开处方者和药剂师之间)。横断面评估采用6点李克特式项目和自由文本部分,由337名参与者完成。参与者对研讨会的内容和他们的学习经历进行了积极的报告,尽管药学和NMP参与者在知识领域存在一些差异。定量分析显示,NMP和药学学生在所有三个领域之间存在中低量级(部分- 2=0.146)的显著差异(p<0.001), NMP学生在所有情况下报告的积极结果略高(高出0.4至1.5分)。然而,两组的得分都是正的;平均领域得分为15.6至16.5分,满分为18分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Case Law: A Review of Selected Pharmaceutical Patents Litigated in the UK Courts during 2022 Ensuring Pharmaceutical Product Success through Excipient QbD Efforts Solubility Enhancement for Dietheyldithiocarbamate-Zinc for Lung Cancer Treatment Impact of Critical Material Attributes of HPMC on the Release of Gliclazide from Hydrophilic Matrix Tablets Comparative Evaluation of the Disintegrant Properties of Starches from Three Cultivars of Dioscorea rotundata (Poir)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1