在提供吸入器技术培训服务时,远程药学与面对面方法的比较:在德国药剂学学生中进行的非劣效性评估。

IF 2.1 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice Pub Date : 2024-09-20 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IPRP.S468881
Bushra Ali Sherazi, Shahzad Ahmad Sayyed, Kathrin Möllenhoff, Stephanie Läer
{"title":"在提供吸入器技术培训服务时,远程药学与面对面方法的比较:在德国药剂学学生中进行的非劣效性评估。","authors":"Bushra Ali Sherazi, Shahzad Ahmad Sayyed, Kathrin Möllenhoff, Stephanie Läer","doi":"10.2147/IPRP.S468881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of telepharmacy in delivering pharmaceutical care services has grown in the past few years; however, there are perceptions of its inappropriateness for providing medical device training among pharmacy students and practicing pharmacists.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to determine if the telepharmacy approach for providing inhaler technique training service was non-inferior to the face-to-face approach regarding pharmacy students' performance in simulated patient encounters. Secondary objectives were to determine students' self-assessment of their ability to demonstrate and practice inhaler technique between the two modes of communication and their perceptions of telepharmacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized crossover non-inferiority trial was conducted among undergraduate pharmacy students. Outcomes were measured by comparing Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores of participants' performance between two modes of communication while providing inhaler technique training service. Moreover, the participants also completed self-assessment and perception questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The telepharmacy approach was non-inferior to the face-to-face approach for demonstrating and practicing the correct inhaler technique based on OSCE scores and a predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%. The results also revealed no significant differences in student self-confidence between the two modes of communication. Moreover, participants had a largely positive perception of telepharmacy and its use in providing inhaler technique training service.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considering our findings, telepharmacy is a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face consultations for providing inhaler technique training service. However, to address perceived difficulties and differences between virtual and face-to-face consultations, the pharmacy curriculum should include more telepharmacy-related didactic content with experiential learning and simulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":45655,"journal":{"name":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11421451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Telepharmacy versus Face-to-Face Approach in Providing Inhaler Technique Training Service: A Non-Inferiority Assessment Among German Pharmacy Students.\",\"authors\":\"Bushra Ali Sherazi, Shahzad Ahmad Sayyed, Kathrin Möllenhoff, Stephanie Läer\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/IPRP.S468881\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of telepharmacy in delivering pharmaceutical care services has grown in the past few years; however, there are perceptions of its inappropriateness for providing medical device training among pharmacy students and practicing pharmacists.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to determine if the telepharmacy approach for providing inhaler technique training service was non-inferior to the face-to-face approach regarding pharmacy students' performance in simulated patient encounters. Secondary objectives were to determine students' self-assessment of their ability to demonstrate and practice inhaler technique between the two modes of communication and their perceptions of telepharmacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A randomized crossover non-inferiority trial was conducted among undergraduate pharmacy students. Outcomes were measured by comparing Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores of participants' performance between two modes of communication while providing inhaler technique training service. Moreover, the participants also completed self-assessment and perception questionnaires.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The telepharmacy approach was non-inferior to the face-to-face approach for demonstrating and practicing the correct inhaler technique based on OSCE scores and a predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%. The results also revealed no significant differences in student self-confidence between the two modes of communication. Moreover, participants had a largely positive perception of telepharmacy and its use in providing inhaler technique training service.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Considering our findings, telepharmacy is a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face consultations for providing inhaler technique training service. However, to address perceived difficulties and differences between virtual and face-to-face consultations, the pharmacy curriculum should include more telepharmacy-related didactic content with experiential learning and simulations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45655,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11421451/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S468881\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S468881","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在过去几年中,远程药学在提供药物护理服务方面的使用越来越多;然而,药学专业学生和执业药师认为远程药学不适合提供医疗器械培训:本研究的主要目的是确定远程药学方法提供的吸入器技术培训服务与面对面的方法相比,在药剂学学生模拟患者接触中的表现是否无劣势。次要目标是确定学生对两种交流模式下展示和练习吸入器技术能力的自我评估,以及他们对远程药学的看法:方法: 在药学本科生中开展了一项随机交叉非劣效性试验。在提供吸入器技术培训服务时,通过比较参与者在两种通信模式下的客观结构化临床考试(OSCE)得分来衡量结果。此外,参与者还填写了自我评估和感知问卷:结果:根据 OSCE 分数和预先设定的-10%的非劣效差,在示范和练习正确的吸入器技术方面,远程药学方法并不比面对面方法差。结果还显示,两种交流模式在学生自信心方面没有明显差异。此外,学员们对远程药学及其在提供吸入器技术培训服务中的应用基本持肯定态度:根据我们的研究结果,在提供吸入器技术培训服务方面,远程药学是传统面对面咨询的可行替代方式。然而,为了解决虚拟咨询与面对面咨询之间的困难和差异,药剂学课程应包含更多与远程药学相关的教学内容,并进行体验式学习和模拟。
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
Telepharmacy versus Face-to-Face Approach in Providing Inhaler Technique Training Service: A Non-Inferiority Assessment Among German Pharmacy Students.

Background: The use of telepharmacy in delivering pharmaceutical care services has grown in the past few years; however, there are perceptions of its inappropriateness for providing medical device training among pharmacy students and practicing pharmacists.

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to determine if the telepharmacy approach for providing inhaler technique training service was non-inferior to the face-to-face approach regarding pharmacy students' performance in simulated patient encounters. Secondary objectives were to determine students' self-assessment of their ability to demonstrate and practice inhaler technique between the two modes of communication and their perceptions of telepharmacy.

Methods: A randomized crossover non-inferiority trial was conducted among undergraduate pharmacy students. Outcomes were measured by comparing Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores of participants' performance between two modes of communication while providing inhaler technique training service. Moreover, the participants also completed self-assessment and perception questionnaires.

Results: The telepharmacy approach was non-inferior to the face-to-face approach for demonstrating and practicing the correct inhaler technique based on OSCE scores and a predefined non-inferiority margin of -10%. The results also revealed no significant differences in student self-confidence between the two modes of communication. Moreover, participants had a largely positive perception of telepharmacy and its use in providing inhaler technique training service.

Conclusion: Considering our findings, telepharmacy is a viable alternative to traditional face-to-face consultations for providing inhaler technique training service. However, to address perceived difficulties and differences between virtual and face-to-face consultations, the pharmacy curriculum should include more telepharmacy-related didactic content with experiential learning and simulations.

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
自引率
3.40%
发文量
29
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Medication Counselling on Unlicensed Medicines Should Be Improved - Results from a Finnish Survey for Patients and Pharmacy Staff. Geographical Disparities in the Distribution of Community Pharmacies Providing Aseptic Preparation Services in Japan. Telepharmacy versus Face-to-Face Approach in Providing Inhaler Technique Training Service: A Non-Inferiority Assessment Among German Pharmacy Students. Determinants of Patient Satisfaction with Discharge Pharmacy Services at a Tertiary Care Center in Jeddah, KSA. Advancing Pharmacy Practice: The Role of Intelligence-Driven Pharmacy Practice and the Emergence of Pharmacointelligence.
×
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