No abstract

Aim(s):This study was designed to compare Indian pharmacy curricula with Pharmacy curriculum of USA, Finland and Denmark to assess differences with a focus on pharmaceutical policies and public health, patient care and pharmacy practice aspects in the programs. Study Design: This is a programmatic research conducted between March 2013 and August 2014. Methods: Curricula of pharmacy programs leading to registered pharmacist in India, USA, Finland and Denmark were selected. By using conversion references, all curricula were converted into number of hours-format to make them comparable. The curriculum contents were divided into four core areas and number of hours were collated and analyzed. Results: The proportions of 4 core areas remarkably vary between the curricula assessed. Diploma in Pharmacy (D Pharm) and Bachelor of Pharmacy (B Pharm) programs in India are allocating about 60% of total time to pharmaceutical sciences against National Association of Boards of Pharmacies's (NABP) Pharmacy Curriculum Outcomes Assessment (PCOA) recommended 30%. D Pharm curriculum is covering 12% (175 hours), B Pharm and Doctor of Pharmacy (Pharm D) cover 8% (315 hours and 462 hours, respectively) against PCOA recommended 22% of social/behavioral/administrative sciences. Indian D Pharm covers 8% (125 hours) and BPharm 2% (90 hours) of clinical sciences, while Indian Pharm D covers 36% which is in par with PCOA recommendation (32%). Finnish and Danish curricula have more electives when compared to Indian curricula. Pharmaceutical policy and public health topics are least allocated in all the programs studied. Conclusion: Indian and US Pharm D programs contain most and Indian D Pharm and B Pharm least public health and patient care aspects. Consequently, India has high number of trained pharmacists, but curriculum is industry focused, although they work in community pharmacies. It is important that the workforce and competency needs of pharmaceutical industry are met. It would be useful to have an alternative curriculum line focusing on patient care and pharmacy practice aspects in Indian D Pharm and B Pharm programs. Further research is needed to assess how well current D Pharm, B Pharm and Pharm D curricula prepare graduating pharmacists to contribute to public health and patient care. This study is first of its kinds, it will be helpful to statutory authorities and curriculum reform committees in India and other countries where pharmacists' role is continuing to evolve towards inclusion of public health and patient care.

Objective: An attempt was made to explore the awareness, perceived knowledge and attitude of Indian pharmacy students on National Public Health Programs (NPHPs). Methods: This study was a cross-sectional classroom survey among final year D Pharm, B Pharm and Pharm D students in India. A survey tool was prepared to assess: (i) pharmacy students' perceived knowledge and attitude towards NPHPs in general; (ii) perceived knowledge on individual NPHPs. The survey tool was distributed to 326 students from 5 randomly selected pharmacy colleges from South India. A brief introduction on NPHPs and study objectives were provided to students and were instructed to respond independently. Results: Of all respondents (n=326), 83% had opined that it was very important/important to include NPHPs in normal pharmacists' training programs. In comparison to D Pharm and B Pharm, a higher proportion of Pharm D students estimated that they knew well/knew to some extent about NPHPs (55% vs, 39% vs. 68%, respectively, p=<0.001). DPharm and Pharm D students indicated higher interest in NPHPs than B Pharm students. Of B Pharm respondents 65% were willing to take up a professional role in NPHPs, whereas 82% DPharm and 85% Pharm D (p=0.001). Of all student groups, only 21% believed that their current knowledge was very much sufficient/sufficient to become active part of NPHPs. 81% students felt that they have very important/important role to play in NPHPs and 96% were willing to take up a professional role and want to learn more about NPHPs. Conclusion: Students had positive attitudes on pharmacists' involvement in NPHPs, although their attitudes varied in different student groups, Pharm D and D Pharm students being most positive towards involvement in NPHPs. The study also revealed the need for increasing contents supporting NPHPs to all pharmacy programs, particularly to B Pharm program. There is scope for detailed national level analysis to identity pharmacists potential in NPHPs.

Background: Community pharmacists could play more potential role when finding ways to allocate effectively limited healthcare resources in primary care in many developing countries, including India. Pharmacists could participate in national public health programs, and cooperate effectively with other members of health care team. This small-scale pilot study was designed to develop a method for characterizing physicians' perceptions on the role of pharmacists in public health and patient care in India. Methods: Six volunteers visited 800 physicians in Southern region in India and collected data in 2014. The survey tool consisted of 28 structured questions concerning: (i) physicians' experiences of cooperation with pharmacists; (ii) physicians' general opinion on pharmacists' involvement in National Public Health Programs (NPHPs) in India; and (iii) pharmacists' involvement in 11 major NPHPs. The data were collated and extracted and descriptive statistical analysis was conducted by SAS (version 9.3). Results: Of total 800 physicians contacted, 129 responded. Of the responding physicians 98% were comfortable with pharmacists' roles in general, 96% were comfortable or somewhat comfortable to collaborate with pharmacists, and 82% regarded pharmacists as part of health care team. The physicians with shorter professional practice were more positive on pharmacists' involvement in NPHPs than physicians having at least 11 years' experience. Overall response of accepting pharmacists' role and involvement in NPHPs was positive, Pulse Polio, HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Tobacco control, and Leprosy eradication programs being the top NPHPs where physicians perceived pharmacists had a role to play. Conclusion: This small-scale pilot study indicates that Indian physicians are willing to collaborate with pharmacists and are comfortable to involve them in the health care team. The survey also revealed differences in opinions between junior and senior physicians: the longer physicians' practice experience was, the less favorable they were for pharmacists' involvement in NPHPs.