Background: While pharmacists are well positioned to implement pharmacogenomic testing in healthcare systems, uptake has been limited. Objective: The primary objective of this survey was to determine how post-graduate education and training influences pharmacist’s knowledge and attitudes of pharmacogenomic testing. Methods: Survey questions were developed by the study team, and responses were collected electronically using REDCapTM. The electronic survey was sent to all pharmacists (n=161) within a large, multi-state healthcare system by email. Results: A total of 75 (47%) respondents completed all aspects of the survey. The majority of respondents were female (60%), worked in acute care settings (57%), were full-time employees (80%), and worked in an urban area (85%), with many graduating in or after 2010 (43%). For post-graduate education, 36% of respondents completed a Post-Graduate Year One Residency (PGY-1), and 27% had a board certification. Those that completed a PGY-1 residency were significantly more likely to have received formal training or education on pharmacogenomics than those who had not. They also assessed their own knowledge of pharmacogenomic resources and guidelines higher than those without PGY-1 training. More recent graduates were also significantly more likely to have received formal training or education on pharmacogenomics. Additionally, pharmacists who completed a PGY-1 residency were more likely to respond favorably to pharmacogenomics being offered through pharmacy services. Pharmacists with board certification were more comfortable interpreting results of a pharmacogenomic test than those without board certification. Conclusions: Pharmacists who have completed a PGY-1 residency or received board certification appear more comfortable with interpretation and implementation of pharmacogenomic testing.

Introduction: Pharmacogenetic (PGx) implementation has lagged behind the development of drug/gene pair guidelines. Materials & methods: This was a prospective study assessing the integration of PGx through medication therapy management in an outpatient clinic. Variables collected included patient diagnosis, current medications, failed or discontinued medications, PGx results/recommendations, turnaround time and pre/post clinical ratings. Results: A total of 91 participants completed study procedures with an average enrollment of approximately one consult per week. Participants were referred for testing primarily for guidance for current and future medications. The average number of recommendations per participant was 0.93. Conclusion: Integrating PGx testing into medication therapy management is feasible with PGx results available in under a week resulting in clinical recommendations in over half of patients tested.

No abstract

No abstract