Objectives. To create a valid assessment tool to evaluate the readiness of pharmacy students for advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs). Design. The Triple Jump Examination (TJE) was tailored to the 4-year, 2-plus-2 curriculum of the College. It consisted of (1) a written, case-based, closed-book examination, (2) a written, case-based open-book examination, and (3) an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). The TJE was administered at the end of each 4 academic semesters. Progression of students to APPEs was dependent on achieving a preset minimum cumulative (weighted average) score in the 4 consecutive TJE examinations. Assessment. The predictive utility of the examination was demonstrated by a strong correlation between the cumulative TJE scores and the preceptor grades in the first year (P3) of APPEs (r 5 0.60, p . 0.0001). Reliability of the TJE was shown by strong correlations among the 4 successive TJE examinations. A survey probing the usefulness of TJE indicated acceptance by both students and faculty members. Conclusion. The TJE program is an effective tool for the assessment of pharmacy students' readiness for the experiential years. In addition, the TJE provides guidance for students to achieve preparedness for APPE.

Objectives. To determine whether students' previous pharmacy-related work experience was associated with their pharmacy school performance (academic and clinical). Methods. The following measures of student academic performance were examined: pharmacy grade point average (GPA), scores on cumulative high-stakes examinations, and advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) grades. The quantity and type of pharmacy-related work experience each student performed prior to matriculation was solicited through a student survey instrument. Survey responses were correlated with academic measures, and demographic-based stratified analyses were conducted. Results. No significant difference in academic or clinical performance between those students with prior pharmacy experience and those without was identified. Subanalyses by work setting, position type, and substantial pharmacy work experience did not reveal any association with student performance. A relationship was found, however, between age and work experience, ie, older students tended to have more work experience than younger students. Conclusions. Prior pharmacy work experience did not affect students' overall academic or clinical performance in pharmacy school. The lack of significant findings may have been due to the inherent practice limitations of nonpharmacist positions, changes in pharmacy education, and the limitations of survey responses.

Objective. To determine whether bullying is a significant factor in the clinical training of pharmacy students. Methods. The literature as well as the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards and American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) surveys were reviewed for mention and/or measurement of bullying behaviors in the clinical training of pharmacy students. The authors used a Delphi process to define bullying behavior. The consensus definition was used to analyze 2,087 in-house student evaluations of preceptors for evidence of bullying behaviors. The authors mapped strings of text from in-house student comments to different, established categories of bullying behaviors. Results. The ACPE Standards and AACP surveys contained no mention or measures of bullying. The 2013 AACP survey data reported overwhelmingly positive preceptor ratings. Of the 2,087 student evaluations of preceptors, 119 (5.7%) had at least 1 low rating. Within those 119 survey instruments, 34 comments were found describing bullying behaviors. Students' responses to the AACP survey were similar to data from the national cohort. Conclusions. Given the evidence that bullying behaviors occur in pharmacy education and that bullying has long-term and short-term damaging effects, more attention should be focused on this problem. Efforts should include addressing bullying in ACPE Standards and AACP survey tools developing a consensus definition for bullying and conducting more research into bullying in the clinical training of pharmacy students.

This paper proposes that co-located retail clinics (RCs) and community pharmacies can increase opportunities to provide more accessible, affordable, and patient-friendly primary care services in the United States. RCs are small businesses of about 150–250 square feet with a clientele of about 10–30 patients each day and most frequently staffed by nurse practitioners (NPs). Community pharmacies in the U.S. at ~67,000 far outnumber RCs at ~2800, thereby opening substantial opportunity for growth. Community pharmacies and pharmacists have been working to increase on-site clinical services, but progress has been slowed by the relative isolation from other practitioners. An ideal merged facility based on an integrated platform is proposed. NPs and pharmacists could share functions that fulfill documented consumer preferences and still maintain separate practice domains. Potential benefits include a broader inventory of clinical services including laboratory tests, immunizations, patient education, and physical assessment, as well as better patient access, interprofessional training opportunities, and economies related to the use of resources, day-to-day operations, and performance metrics. Challenges include the availability of sufficient, appropriately trained staff; limitations imposed by scope of practice and other laws; forging of collaborative relationships between NPs and pharmacists; and evidence that the merged operations provide economic benefits beyond those of separate enterprises.