Preceptor Perceptions of Team Quality Improvement Projects Conducted With the Educating Pharmacists in Quality Program

Nelson, Melissa; Dean, Joni; Hannum, Cameron; Warholak, Terri

doi:10.1177/1062860618787774

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the data collected for this domain reflected a similar presentation rate to previous work in this area. 2,8,12,13 For example, Assemi et al reports project dissemination rates of 42.3% as a submitted publication, 37.8% as a poster and 4.5% as an oral presentation. 2 Warholak states 39% of preceptors reported the QA poster was presented at least once in addition to their required presentation and 19% were planning to present in another settings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Student Research Project Impact Using the Buxton and Hanney Payback Framework

Cooley

Beaudrie-Nunn

Slack

et al. 2023

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Determine if evidence of the impact of student quality improvement (QI) and research projects on practice sites and the community can be identified using the Buxton and Hanney Payback Framework (BHPF). Methods: The BHPF was used to identify the broader impact of QI and research projects conducted by the Doctor of Pharmacy Class of 2020. The BHPF includes five domains of community impact: knowledge production, benefits to health or the health sector, benefits to future research, economic benefits, and policy and product development. Data were collected by surveying project preceptors and by reviewing student project posters. Data were analyzed by calculating frequencies and percentages for each domain. Results: Projects (n=73) were completed by 107 students at health system, community, academic and other sites, most often involved clinical care and pharmacy services (49%). Thirty-three preceptors (55%) responded to the survey and 73 project posters were reviewed. The most frequently identified impact types were knowledge production (N=43 for survey, N=24 for posters) and health/health sector benefits (N=46 for survey, N=8 for posters). Less frequently identified were economic benefits (total N=19), benefits to future research (total N=13), and policy and product development (total N=10). Conclusions: This study provides evidence that impact of PharmD student QI and research projects on practice sites and communities can be identified using the BHPF framework and that impact extends beyond the usual academic outcomes of poster presentations and publications to include benefits related to improving quality of services, improving workflow, and providing opportunity for personal development.

show abstract