The Future of Medication Information Practice: A Consensus

Vanscoy, Gordon J.; Gajewski, Lidia K.; Tyler, Linda S.; Gora‐Harper, Mary Lea; Grant, Kiran; May, Jeffrey

doi:10.1177/106002809603000731

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The workload and activities of DIC pharmacists are also similar to their counterparts in these countries. However, with evolving paradigms in drug information provision (15), the pharmacists must engage in formalized and continual training in drug information, and seek to expand/transform their professional activities. It is also important for the DICs to institute formal quality assurance programmes and evaluate their economic value on healthcare in order to justify continued funding in the current healthcare environment that emphasizes quality and cost‐effectiveness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmacist‐operated drug information centres in Singapore

Lim

Chui

1999

Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmacist‐operated drug information centres in Singapore

Lim

Chui

1999

Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A 1996 report by Vanscoy et al 21 recommended change for drug information practice. The attendees of the 1994 CAMIPR retreat predicted that drug information specialists most likely would act as medication policy managers, information systems experts, and outcomes researchers in the following 3 to 5 years (ie, 1997 to 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, pharmacists not captured in the study sample may engage in these responsibilities more than the study respondents. The CAMIPR report 21 also noted a potential “two-tiered role” for drug information specialists. One of the roles was described as that of an “information manager” who would be an expert in medication outcomes management research, including pharmacoeconomic research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey of Current Perceptions of Drug Information Practice and Training

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the current perceptions of drug information practice and training. Methods Electronic surveys were sent to 417 pharmacists who likely would have drug information responsibilities. The survey collected information regarding job responsibilities, perceived importance of each responsibility to drug information practice, type of postgraduate training received to prepare for responsibilities, and perceived adequacy of training. Results There were 206 survey respondents. The most frequently cited primary job responsibilities were providing instruction to students and staff, operating drug information centers, and responding to drug information queries. Most respondents felt that educational instruction, pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committee support, and responding to drug information questions were very important to drug information practice. On-the-job experience was cited as the most frequent source of training. Of the respondents, 46% reported completion of a pharmacy practice residency and 40% reported completion of a drug information specialty residency, with 14% completing both. Fifteen percent of respondents had no postgraduate training. Most respondents felt prepared for current job responsibilities after postgraduate training, with the exceptions of information systems support, pharmacoeconomic evaluations, and clinical outcomes research. Conclusion Despite earlier recommendations, drug information job responsibilities within the study sample have changed little over the past decade. Respondents felt that most of their job responsibilities are important to drug information practice and that postgraduate training adequately prepared them for most of these responsibilities. However, only 40% of respondents received specialized training in drug information practice.

show abstract

“…drug services, and maintaining poison control centers. 1,3,4 The accreditation standards of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) for pharmacy practice residencies (PPRs) establish a foundation for a well-rounded residency experience and the receipt of appropriate feedback and guidance. 5 The accreditation standards promulgated through ASHP's Residency Learning System (RLS) outline core competencies for pharmacy practice residents with corresponding goals.…”

Section: Reports Drug Information Requirementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meeting the modified drug information requirements of ASHP-accredited pharmacy practice residency programs

Ansani

Schober²,

Fedutes³

et al. 2003

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T raining in drug information (DI) teaches a systematic approach to searching and evaluating drug literature, problem analysis, and communication, which helps ensure the appropriateness and completeness of responses while minimizing errors. These skills serve as a foundation for residents to draw upon as they work to meet their clinical and practice responsibilities. 1,2 As a specialty practice area, DI includes not only the provision of accurate, unbiased drug information but also establishing and maintaining a formulary system, conducting pharmacoeconomic and pharmacotherapeutic evaluations and drug-use evaluations (DUEs), establishing reporting systems for adverse drug events and medication errors, educating health care professionals, conducting scholarly activities and research, providing investigational Abstract: The current standards for meeting drug information (DI) requirements in American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP)-accredited pharmacy practice residency (PPR) programs and the impact of changes in ASHP standards for the DI requirements were studied.In September 2002 a nine-question survey was e-mailed to the directors of all ASHP-accredited PPR programs listed with an available e-mail address on ASHP's residency directory Web page as of August 2002. The program directors were asked to provide information on the demographics of their practice settings, the current methods of completing the DI requirements of their programs, whether the DI requirements had changed between the 2001-02 and 2002-03 residency years, and whether any changes in the DI requirements were anticipated.A total of 178 (49%) of 365 PPR programs responded. Of the respondents, 87% were located in a hospital setting, 33% were affiliated with a school of pharmacy, and 40% had a formal onsite DI center. Half of the respondents fulfilled DI requirements through a longitudinal rotation, 20% through a block rotation, and 27% through both. Eighty-two percent of the respondents were familiar with the revised ASHP DI requirements, and 26% had modified their DI requirements between the 2001-02 and 2002-03 residency years. Seventeen percent anticipated changing their DI requirements in the future. Influences for modifications to the programs' DI requirements were mainly ASHP revisions and feedback from preceptors and residents.A national survey suggested that DI requirements in PPR programs are primarily achieved through a longitudinal rotation design.

show abstract

The Future of Medication Information Practice: A Consensus

Cited by 8 publications

References 1 publication

Pharmacist‐operated drug information centres in Singapore

Pharmacist‐operated drug information centres in Singapore

A Survey of Current Perceptions of Drug Information Practice and Training

Meeting the modified drug information requirements of ASHP-accredited pharmacy practice residency programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About