医院和社区药剂师研究设计联合研讨会评估:回顾性横断面调查。

IF 1.2 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences Pub Date : 2024-03-04 DOI:10.1186/s40780-024-00337-x
Yuki Asai, Yasushi Takai, Toshiki Murasaka, Tomohiro Miyake, Tomohisa Nakamura, Yoshihiko Morikawa, Yuji Nakagawa, Tatsuya Kanayama, Yasuharu Abe, Naoki Masuda, Yasushi Takamura, Yoshihiro Miki, Takuya Iwamoto
{"title":"医院和社区药剂师研究设计联合研讨会评估:回顾性横断面调查。","authors":"Yuki Asai, Yasushi Takai, Toshiki Murasaka, Tomohiro Miyake, Tomohisa Nakamura, Yoshihiko Morikawa, Yuji Nakagawa, Tatsuya Kanayama, Yasuharu Abe, Naoki Masuda, Yasushi Takamura, Yoshihiro Miki, Takuya Iwamoto","doi":"10.1186/s40780-024-00337-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although pharmacists often identify numerous clinical questions, they face several barriers, including the lack of mentors for research activities in clinical settings. Therefore, a workshop for the appropriate selection of a study design, which is a fundamental first step, may be necessary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists. Moreover, the characteristics of pharmacists with little involvement in research activities were extracted using decision-tree analysis to guide the design of future workshops.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A workshop was conducted on October 1, 2023. It comprised three parts: lectures, group work, and presentations. Questionnaire-based surveys were conducted with workshop participants regarding their basic information, their background that influenced research activities, their satisfaction, and their knowledge/awareness. For the questions on knowledge/awareness, the same responses were requested before and after the workshop using a five-scale scoring system. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors influencing research activities. Decision tree analysis was performed to extract low-effort characteristics of the research activities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 40 workshop attendees, the overall satisfaction score for the workshop was 4.38 of 5, and the score for each question was 4 or higher. Significant increases were observed in the scores of knowledge/awareness after the workshop. Moreover, 95% of the pharmacists answered that it would be highly useful to conduct a joint workshop between hospitals and community pharmacists. Although independent influencing factors were not detected in the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the decision tree analysis revealed that pharmacists who were no member of an academic society (85%, 11/13) or members without any certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice (80%, 4/5) were the least active in clinical research. In contrast, those belonging to academic societies and holding certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice frequently conducted clinical research.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study revealed that a joint workshop on study design may have the potential to change pharmacists' knowledge and awareness of research activities. Moreover, future workshops should be conducted with pharmacists who do not belong to academic societies.</p>","PeriodicalId":16730,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10910793/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of a joint workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists: a retrospective cross-sectional survey.\",\"authors\":\"Yuki Asai, Yasushi Takai, Toshiki Murasaka, Tomohiro Miyake, Tomohisa Nakamura, Yoshihiko Morikawa, Yuji Nakagawa, Tatsuya Kanayama, Yasuharu Abe, Naoki Masuda, Yasushi Takamura, Yoshihiro Miki, Takuya Iwamoto\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40780-024-00337-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although pharmacists often identify numerous clinical questions, they face several barriers, including the lack of mentors for research activities in clinical settings. Therefore, a workshop for the appropriate selection of a study design, which is a fundamental first step, may be necessary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists. Moreover, the characteristics of pharmacists with little involvement in research activities were extracted using decision-tree analysis to guide the design of future workshops.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A workshop was conducted on October 1, 2023. It comprised three parts: lectures, group work, and presentations. Questionnaire-based surveys were conducted with workshop participants regarding their basic information, their background that influenced research activities, their satisfaction, and their knowledge/awareness. For the questions on knowledge/awareness, the same responses were requested before and after the workshop using a five-scale scoring system. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors influencing research activities. Decision tree analysis was performed to extract low-effort characteristics of the research activities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 40 workshop attendees, the overall satisfaction score for the workshop was 4.38 of 5, and the score for each question was 4 or higher. Significant increases were observed in the scores of knowledge/awareness after the workshop. Moreover, 95% of the pharmacists answered that it would be highly useful to conduct a joint workshop between hospitals and community pharmacists. Although independent influencing factors were not detected in the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the decision tree analysis revealed that pharmacists who were no member of an academic society (85%, 11/13) or members without any certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice (80%, 4/5) were the least active in clinical research. In contrast, those belonging to academic societies and holding certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice frequently conducted clinical research.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study revealed that a joint workshop on study design may have the potential to change pharmacists' knowledge and awareness of research activities. Moreover, future workshops should be conducted with pharmacists who do not belong to academic societies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10910793/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-024-00337-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-024-00337-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:虽然药剂师经常会发现许多临床问题,但他们面临着一些障碍,包括缺乏临床研究活动的指导者。因此,可能有必要举办一个研讨会,以适当选择研究设计,这是基本的第一步。本研究旨在评估为医院和社区药剂师举办的研究设计研讨会的效果。此外,还利用决策树分析法提取了很少参与研究活动的药剂师的特点,以指导今后研讨会的设计:研讨会于 2023 年 10 月 1 日举行。研讨会由三个部分组成:讲座、小组合作和演讲。对研讨会参与者进行了问卷调查,内容包括他们的基本信息、影响研究活动的背景、他们的满意度以及他们的知识/意识。对于知识/意识方面的问题,采用五级评分法要求学员在研修班前后做出相同的回答。进行了多元逻辑回归分析,以确定影响研究活动的独立因素。此外,还进行了决策树分析,以提取研究活动的低强度特征:在 40 名研修班学员中,研修班的总体满意度为 4.38 分(满分为 5 分),每个问题的得分都在 4 分或以上。研修班结束后,药剂师的知识/认知度得分明显提高。此外,95% 的药剂师回答说,举办医院与社区药剂师联合工作坊非常有用。虽然在多元逻辑回归分析中未发现独立的影响因素,但决策树分析显示,非学术团体成员(85%,11/13)或未获得任何与药学实践相关的认证或资格的成员(80%,4/5)的药剂师在临床研究中最不活跃。相比之下,那些属于学术团体并持有与药学实践相关的认证或资格证书的医师则经常开展临床研究:本研究表明,关于研究设计的联合研讨会有可能改变药剂师对研究活动的了解和认识。此外,今后应与不属于学术团体的药剂师共同举办研讨会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluation of a joint workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists: a retrospective cross-sectional survey.

Background: Although pharmacists often identify numerous clinical questions, they face several barriers, including the lack of mentors for research activities in clinical settings. Therefore, a workshop for the appropriate selection of a study design, which is a fundamental first step, may be necessary. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a workshop on study design for hospital and community pharmacists. Moreover, the characteristics of pharmacists with little involvement in research activities were extracted using decision-tree analysis to guide the design of future workshops.

Methods: A workshop was conducted on October 1, 2023. It comprised three parts: lectures, group work, and presentations. Questionnaire-based surveys were conducted with workshop participants regarding their basic information, their background that influenced research activities, their satisfaction, and their knowledge/awareness. For the questions on knowledge/awareness, the same responses were requested before and after the workshop using a five-scale scoring system. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent factors influencing research activities. Decision tree analysis was performed to extract low-effort characteristics of the research activities.

Results: Of the 40 workshop attendees, the overall satisfaction score for the workshop was 4.38 of 5, and the score for each question was 4 or higher. Significant increases were observed in the scores of knowledge/awareness after the workshop. Moreover, 95% of the pharmacists answered that it would be highly useful to conduct a joint workshop between hospitals and community pharmacists. Although independent influencing factors were not detected in the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the decision tree analysis revealed that pharmacists who were no member of an academic society (85%, 11/13) or members without any certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice (80%, 4/5) were the least active in clinical research. In contrast, those belonging to academic societies and holding certifications or accreditations related to pharmacy practice frequently conducted clinical research.

Conclusion: The present study revealed that a joint workshop on study design may have the potential to change pharmacists' knowledge and awareness of research activities. Moreover, future workshops should be conducted with pharmacists who do not belong to academic societies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Compatibility of hypokalaemia caused by low-dose prednisolone plus abiraterone acetate therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. A qualitative study on the current status and problems of pharmacists in home healthcare from the viewpoint of care managers in medically underpopulated areas in Japan. Effects of famotidine use during pregnancy: an observational cohort study. Development and validation of the prediction score for augmented renal clearance in critically Ill Japanese adults. Investigating the hypothermic effects of fluoroquinolone antimicrobials on non-bacterial fever model mice.
×
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