Objective. To compare pharmacy students' performance in a therapeutics course after attending live lectures and/or viewing video-recorded lectures. Methods. Attendance was taken during seven lectures spaced equally throughout the therapeutics course. Data on students' viewing of the video-recorded lectures was extracted. Students were grouped based on class attendance and video-viewing behavior; these data were correlated to student performance on examination lecture specific material. The data were also evaluated based on students' final course grade. Results. From each lecture for which data were collected, between 346 and 349 students were included in the analysis, resulting in 2,430 data points. Students who were attended lecture and did not access the video-recorded lecture were associated with better performance on the respective examination than students who were absent and accessed the video-recorded lecture only once (grade571.0 vs 62.3). Students who attended lecture, regardless of whether they subsequently viewed the video online, were associated with better performance on the examination than students who were absent (70.4 vs 64.0). Among all students who attended lecture, those that also used the video-recorded lecture were associated with similar performance on the examination as those who did not access the video (grade569.1 vs 71.0). Conclusion.Results from this pilot study demonstrated that live class attendance was associated with higher examination performance than viewing recorded lectures for a therapeutics class. The results of this pilot study can be used to guide future research in understanding how teaching methods affect student performance.

Introduction: Medical emergency response teams optimally involve interdisciplinary expertise, including pharmacists. A pharmacist may make therapy recommendations, prepare medications, and act as a drug information resource, which are important skills for a postgraduate year one pharmacy resident (PGY1) to develop. Limited data exist evaluating current national practices for PGY1 emergency response.Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe national practices for PGY1 emergency response. These data may help PGY1 programs identify potential best practices for self-improvement. Methods: An anonymous survey was developed to describe PGY1 emergency response within the United States and electronically distributed to PGY1 residency program directors. The questionnaire included general demographic information along with questions involving pharmacist and pharmacy resident emergency response and training within their institution. A univariate analysis was performed to evaluate potential predictors of survey respondent confidence in PGY1 independent emergency response by the end of the residency year.Results: A total of 178 completed responses were obtained (response rate: 33.0%). The majority of respondents had both pharmacist and PGY1 response at their institution, with response to cardiopulmonary arrest being the most common. Of the 36 programs that did not have pharmacy resident involvement, the most common reason was due to lack of pharmacy response at their institution (61.1%). The majority of programs (68.3%) were confident in the ability for a PGY1 to independently respond by the end of their residency year. Only the number of emergency response by the end of the residency year was a predictor in their confidence of PGY1 independent response (p = 0.002). Conclusion:The majority of PGY1 programs had both pharmacist and pharmacy resident response to medical emergencies. The results of this survey may help PGY1 programs identify potential areas of improvement and help prospective residency candidates identify program characteristics that may best prepare them for emergency response.

Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose To manage factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor–associated bleeding, andexanet alfa or 4-factor prothrombin concentrate (4F-PCC) has been used to restore hemostasis. However, literature on the outcomes for patients who received both andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC is limited. Summary We report a case series of 5 patients who received andexanet alfa plus 4F-PCC for reversal of FXa inhibitor–associated bleeding. Patients were included in this case series if they received both andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC for reversal of FXa inhibitor–associated bleeding. They were followed to either discharge or death, and in-hospital complications related to concurrent use of andexanet alfa and 4F-PCC were documented. We report an incidence of thromboembolism of 40% (2 of 5 cases) and an in-hospital mortality rate of 60% (3 of 5 cases). Taking these cases together with those in the existing literature, we found a total of 23 reported cases of safety outcomes with andexanet alfa plus 4F-PCC. The overall incidence of thromboembolism was 35% (8 of 23 cases). Conclusion This case series adds to the limited literature describing the outcomes for patients receiving andexanet alfa plus 4F-PCC. We encourage other institutions to report safety data on administering both agents.

IntroductionMedical emergency response within the hospital involves an interdisciplinary team, including pharmacists. Pharmacist involvement in these teams has increased over time due to published benefits of their involvement. Development of emergency response skills may start during pharmacy residency, although limited data suggest how this is best implemented.ObjectivesLimited data evaluate post‐graduate year 2 (PGY2) pharmacy resident training for emergency response, as well as PGY2 program values for this in screening/ranking candidates, which may help post‐graduate year one (PGY1) pharmacy residents identify residency programs that are a good fit for their career goals.MethodsA list of PGY2 critical care (CC) and emergency medicine (EM) programs were identified. The questionnaire included program demographics, characteristics of PGY2 emergency response training, and PGY2 residency program values of PGY1 emergency response exposure for screening and ranking applicants for their programs. A Fisher's exact test was used to compare differences between CC and EM programs for these outcomes.ResultsA total of 85 complete responses were analyzed (response rate by all identified programs: CC = 36.4%; EM = 32.1%). Emergency response training was often with both core and longitudinal experiences (72.9%), although differed by type of program (p < 0.001). Both CC and EM programs considered PGY1 pharmacy resident exposure to emergency response in screening candidates (33.9% and 57.7%, respectively), as well as ranking candidates (22% and 38.5%, respectively). For CC programs, both Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support certification and quantity of PGY1 emergency response ranked as the most important characteristics, while EM programs ranked quantity as the most important.ConclusionThe results of this survey indicate heterogeneity in PGY2 CC and EM emergency response training. PGY1 applicants for these programs should consider their experience with emergency response as a potential factor in identifying an appropriate program for their training.

Introduction Medical emergency response within the hospital involves an interdisciplinary team, including pharmacists. Pharmacist involvement in these teams has increased over time due to published benefits of their involvement. Development of emergency response skills may start during pharmacy residency, although limited data suggest how this is best implemented. Objectives Limited data evaluate post-graduate year 2 (PGY2) pharmacy resident training for emergency response, as well as PGY2 program values for this in screening/ranking candidates. A survey may help PGY2 programs improve their own programs and allow post-graduate year one (PGY1) pharmacy residents to identify residency programs that are a good fit for their career goals. Methods A list of PGY2 critical care (CC) and emergency medicine (EM) programs were identified. The questionnaire included program demographics, characteristics of PGY2 emergency response training, and PGY2 residency program values of PGY1 emergency response exposure for screening and ranking applicants for their programs. A Fisher's exact test was used to compare differences between CC and EM programs for these outcomes. Results A total of 85 complete responses were analyzed (response rate: CC = 36.4%; EM = 32.1%). Emergency response training was often with both core and longitudinal experiences (72.9%), although differed by type of programs (p<0.001). Both CC and EM programs considered PGY1 pharmacy resident exposure to emergency response in screening candidates (33.9% and 57.7%, respectively), as well as ranking candidates (22% and 38.5%, respectively). For CC programs, both Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support certification and quantity of PGY1 emergency response ranked as the most important characteristics, while EM programs ranked quantity as the most important. Conclusion The results of this survey indicate heterogeneity in PGY2 CC and EM emergency response training. PGY1 applicants for these programs should consider their experience with emergency response as a factor in identifying an appropriate program for their initial training.