Objective. To increase the percentage of state, national, or international student presentations and publications. Design. A multi-faceted intervention to increase student scholarly output was developed that included: (1) a 120-minute lecture on publication of quality improvement or independent study research findings; (2) abstract workshops; (3) poster workshops; and (4) a reminder at an advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) meeting encouraging students to publish or present posters. The intervention effect was measured as the percent of students who presented at meetings and the number of student projects published. Assessment. A significant increase occurred in the percent of students who presented posters or published manuscripts after the intervention (64% vs 81%). Total student productivity increased from 84 to 147 posters, publications, and presentations. The number of projects presented or published increased from 50 to 77 in one year. Conclusion. This high-impact, low-cost intervention increased scholarly output and may help students stand out in a competitive job market.
Objective. Analyze quality improvement (QI) education across US pharmacy programs. Methods. This was a two stage cross-sectional study that inspected each accredited school website for published QI curriculum or related content, and e-mailed a questionnaire to each school asking about QI curriculum or content. T-test and chi square were used for analysis with an alpha a priori set at .05. Results. Sixty responses (47% response rate) revealed the least-covered QI topics: quality dashboards / sentinel systems (30%); six-sigma or other QI methodologies (45%); safety and quality measures (57%); Medicare Star measures and payment incentives (58%); and how to implement changes to improve quality (60%). More private institutions covered Adverse Drug Events than public institutions and required a dedicated QI class; however, required QI projects were more often reported by public institutions. Conclusion. Despite the need for pharmacists to understand QI, it is not covered well in school curricula.
Grant funding from SinfoniaRx to Taylor, Axon, Campbell, Fair, and Warholak was used to help conduct this project. Boesen is employed by SinfoniaRx. The other authors have nothing to disclose. This original research was presented as a poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 27th Annual Meeting and Expo; April 7-10, 2015; San Diego, CA.
Background
Accurate measurements for determining cardiac index can be obtained while patients are supine in bed at various backrest elevations. It is not clear if these measurements are accurate when patients are in a bedside chair.
Objective
To determine if cardiac index based on measurements obtained with the patient in a chair is similar to cardiac index based on measurements obtained with the patient in bed.
Methods
A convenience sample of cardiac surgical patients and a method-comparison design were used to compare cardiac index values based on measurements obtained with patients in 2 different positions: in a chair and in the bed. A standard thermodilution technique was used to measure cardiac output. Measurement of cardiac output in the second position was obtained immediately after measurement in the first position. Positions were randomly assigned. Bias and precision were calculated and graphed with the Bland-Altman method. Differences in cardiac index of 0.50 or more were considered clinically significant. Analysis of variance was used to determine differences between cardiac index values for the 2 positions.
Results
A total of 27 postoperative cardiac surgical patients were studied. Cardiac index values based on measurements obtained with patients in the 2 different positions did not differ significantly (F1,50 = 0.446; P = .51). The mean difference score (bias) between the 2 positions was −0.07 (precision, 0.30)
Conclusions
The practice of putting cardiac surgical patients whose hemodynamic status is stable back to bed before obtaining measurements for calculation of cardiac index may not be required for accurate values.
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.