This study aimed at describing the experience of academic staff and students with distance education, during the COVID-19 pandemic, at a college of pharmacy in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This study used a mixed-method approach. The first phase implemented a survey that targeted both academic staff and students to evaluate their experiences with distance education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Then, a focus group discussion was conducted to explore, in-depth, their experience. The survey consisted of five domains as follows: readiness for the shift to distance education during the full and partial lockdown, perception towards distance education, barriers against distance education, and the acquisitions due to distance education. A five-point Likert scale was used to assess participants' responses to the different domains (mean score ± standard deviation). Results: Seventy-eight percent of the academic staff and 65% of the students responded to the survey. Participants' views were positive for readiness for the shift to distance education during the full lockdown (3.89±0.42 for academic staff and 3.82±0.50 for students) with almost similar evaluation for the readiness during the blended learning period (3.91±0.44 for staff and 3.83±0.59 for students). The findings showed a generally positive perception towards distance education (3.59± 0.67 for academic staff and 3.47±0.64 for students). The acquisitions due to distance education were also positive (3.95±0.72 for academic staff and 3.78±0.77 for students). Nonetheless, some barriers that affected distance education were raised with an overall neutral view from both academic staff (3.31±0.72) and students (3.31±0.64), with different responses for the individual items. Qualitative findings from the focus group discussions explored the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges, with emphasis on the areas for improvement. Conclusion: Although the shift for distance education was out of a sudden, participants showed overall positive views about their experience with distance education and highlighted areas for improvement.
Simulation-based education (SBE) is a fundamental teaching method that complements traditional teaching modalities. SBE has improved students’ knowledge, understanding, and numerous essential skills within undergraduate pharmacy education, similar to traditional teaching methods. However, SBE has become crucial for developing students’ teamwork, decision-making, and communication skills. Even though the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) has acknowledged the benefit of SBE in interprofessional education (IPE) and the introductory pharmacy practice experience (IPPE). This article provides evidence that SBE can be effective beyond that. This narrative review is focused on the literature related to SBE modalities and the assessment methods of student learning outcomes in the undergraduate pharmacy curriculum. The review illustrates that SBE is an effective teaching method that could be utilized within the pharmacy curriculum. The review also could help pharmacy educators decide on the best modality and placement of integrating patient simulation within the pharmacy curriculum. Combining multiple simulation techniques may be the best way to achieve the desired student learning outcomes.
Purpose. To evaluate the impact of early (<3 weeks) versus late (>3 weeks) urinary stent removal on urinary tract infections (UTIs) post renal transplantation. Methods. A retrospective study was performed including all adult renal transplants who were transplanted between January 2017 and May 2020 with a minimum of 6-month follow-up at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Results. A total of 279 kidney recipients included in the study were stratified into 114 in the early stent removal group (ESR) and 165 in the late stent removal group (LSR). Mean age was 43.4 ± 15.8; women: n: 114, 40.90%; and deceased donor transplant: n: 55, 19.70%. Mean stent removal time was 35.3 ± 28.0 days posttransplant (14.1 ± 4.6 days in the ESR versus 49.9 ± 28.1 days in LSR, p < 0.001 ). Seventy-four UTIs were diagnosed while the stents were in vivo or up to two weeks after the stent removal “UTIs related to the stent” (n = 20, 17.5% in ESR versus n = 54, 32.7% in LSR; p = 0.006 ). By six months after transplantation, there were 97 UTIs (n = 36, 31.6% UTIs in ESR versus n = 61, 37% in LSR; p = 0.373 ). Compared with UTIs diagnosed after stent removal, UTIs diagnosed while the stent was still in vivo tended to be complicated (17.9% versus 4.9%, p : 0.019), recurrent (66.1% versus 46.3%; p : 0.063), associated with bacteremia (10.7% versus 0%; p : 0.019), and requiring hospitalization (61% versus 24%, p : 0.024). Early stent removal decreased the need for expedited stent removal due to UTI reasons (rate of UTIs before stent removal) (n = 11, 9% in the early group versus n = 45, 27% in the late group; p = 0.001 ). The effect on the rate of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) was less clear (33% versus 47%, p : 0.205). Early stent removal was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of UTIs related to the stent (HR = 0.505, 95% CI: 0.302-0.844, p = 0.009 ) without increasing the incidence of urological complications. Removing the stent before 21 days posttransplantation decreased UTIs related to stent (aOR: 0.403, CI: 0.218-0.744). Removing the stent before 14 days may even further decrease the risk of UTIs (aOR: 0.311, CI: 0.035- 2.726). Conclusion. Early ureteric stent removal defined as less than 21 days post renal transplantation reduced the incidence of UTIs related to stent without increasing the incidence of urological complications. UTIs occurring while the ureteric stent still in vivo were notably associated with bacteremia and hospitalization. A randomized trial will be required to further determine the best timing for stent removal.
Purpose. Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are common in the first 6 months after renal transplantation, and there are only limited data about UTIs after transplantation in Saudi Arabia in general. Methods. A retrospective study from January 2017 to May 2020 with 6-month follow-up. Results. 279 renal transplant recipients were included. Mean age was 43.4 ± 16.0 years, and114 (40.9%) were women. Urinary stents were inserted routinely during transplantation and were removed 35.3 ± 28 days postoperatively. Ninety-seven patients (35%) developed urinary tract infections (UTIs) in the first six months after renal transplantation. Of those who developed the first episode of UTI, the recurrence rates were 57%, 27%, and 14% for having one, two, or three recurrences, respectively. Late urinary stent removals, defined as more than 21 days postoperatively, tended to have more UTIs (OR: 1.43, P: 0.259, CI: 0.76–2.66). Age >40, female gender, history of neurogenic bladder, and transplantation abroad were statistically significant factors associated with UTIs and recurrence. Diabetes, level of immunosuppression, deceased donor renal transplantation, pretransplant residual urine volume, or history of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) was not associated with a higher incidence of UTIs. UTIs were asymptomatic in 60% but complicated with bacteremia in 6% of the cases. Multidrug resistant organisms (MDROs) were the causative organisms in 42% of cases, and in-hospital treatment was required in about 50% of cases. Norfloxacin + Bactrim DD (160/800 mg) every other day was not associated with the lower risk of developing UTIs compared to the standard prophylaxis daily Bactrim SS (80/400 mg). Conclusion. UTIs and recurrence are common in the first 6 months after renal transplantation. Age >40, female gender, neurogenic bladder, and transplantation abroad are associated with the increased risk of UTIs and recurrence. MDROs are common causative organisms, and hospitalization is frequently required. Dual prophylactic antibiotics did not seem to be advantageous over the standard daily Bactrim.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.