Defining evidence requirements for a Development Framework for Pharmacists (DFP) in community pharmacy practice

IF 0.5 Q4 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Joy Boon Ka Chong, Shun Wei Lim, Xue Liang Goh, Sarah Li Hui Gan, H. Wee
{"title":"Defining evidence requirements for a Development Framework for Pharmacists (DFP) in community pharmacy practice","authors":"Joy Boon Ka Chong, Shun Wei Lim, Xue Liang Goh, Sarah Li Hui Gan, H. Wee","doi":"10.46542/pe.2024.241.248261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The Development Framework for Pharmacists (DFP) was implemented in a pharmacy chain to guide pharmacist development. Both pharmacists and their supervisors faced challenges in defining evidence and performance levels for Domain 1 (Expert professional practice) standards. This study explored these challenges in a community pharmacy setting.\nMethods: Three online focus group discussions (FGDs) involving a DFP workgroup member and representatives from community pharmacies and polyclinics were conducted. The FGDs were facilitated by guiding questions and evidences gathered from pharmacists who had attempted the DFP. The FGDs were recorded, transcribed, and coded thematically.\nResults: Participants viewed the DFP as relevant to community practice but suggested aligning DFP evidence examples with community pharmacists’ responsibilities. Key themes from the FGDs included: (1) The need for clear definitions for descriptors, especially when identical evidence was used for different standards; (2) Professional education can be Domain 1 evidence when skills learned are demonstrated in the workplace; (3) Potential inclusion of education and training activities in Domain 1. (4) The need for a criteria model to assess pharmacists’ performance level in various roles and situations; (5) Clarification regarding the term \"group of patients\" (6) Considering back-end work as Domain 1 evidence.\nConclusion: Addressing the above themes could enhance DFP integration for community pharmacists.","PeriodicalId":19944,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacy Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacy Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46542/pe.2024.241.248261","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Development Framework for Pharmacists (DFP) was implemented in a pharmacy chain to guide pharmacist development. Both pharmacists and their supervisors faced challenges in defining evidence and performance levels for Domain 1 (Expert professional practice) standards. This study explored these challenges in a community pharmacy setting. Methods: Three online focus group discussions (FGDs) involving a DFP workgroup member and representatives from community pharmacies and polyclinics were conducted. The FGDs were facilitated by guiding questions and evidences gathered from pharmacists who had attempted the DFP. The FGDs were recorded, transcribed, and coded thematically. Results: Participants viewed the DFP as relevant to community practice but suggested aligning DFP evidence examples with community pharmacists’ responsibilities. Key themes from the FGDs included: (1) The need for clear definitions for descriptors, especially when identical evidence was used for different standards; (2) Professional education can be Domain 1 evidence when skills learned are demonstrated in the workplace; (3) Potential inclusion of education and training activities in Domain 1. (4) The need for a criteria model to assess pharmacists’ performance level in various roles and situations; (5) Clarification regarding the term "group of patients" (6) Considering back-end work as Domain 1 evidence. Conclusion: Addressing the above themes could enhance DFP integration for community pharmacists.
确定社区药房实践中药剂师发展框架 (DFP) 的证据要求
背景:一家连锁药店实施了药剂师发展框架 (DFP),以指导药剂师的发展。药剂师及其主管在确定领域 1(专家专业实践)标准的证据和绩效水平时都面临着挑战。本研究探讨了在社区药房环境中面临的这些挑战:进行了三次在线焦点小组讨论 (FGD),DFP 工作组的一名成员以及社区药房和综合诊所的代表参加了讨论。FGD 以指导性问题和从尝试过 DFP 的药剂师那里收集的证据为基础。对 FGD 进行了记录、转录和主题编码:结果:与会者认为 DFP 与社区实践相关,但建议将 DFP 证据范例与社区药剂师的职责相结合。FGD 的关键主题包括(1) 需要对描述符进行明确定义,尤其是当相同证据用于不同标准时;(2) 当学到的技能在工作场所得到展示时,专业教育可作为领域 1 证据;(3) 将教育和培训活动纳入领域 1 的可能性;(4) 需要一个标准模型来评估药剂师在不同角色和情况下的绩效水平;(5) 澄清 "患者群体 "一词;(6) 将后端工作视为领域 1 证据:解决上述问题可加强社区药剂师的 DFP 整合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pharmacy Education
Pharmacy Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: Pharmacy Education journal provides a research, development and evaluation forum for communication between academic teachers, researchers and practitioners in professional and pharmacy education, with an emphasis on new and established teaching and learning methods, new curriculum and syllabus directions, educational outcomes, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and workforce development. It is a peer-reviewed online open access platform for the dissemination of new ideas in professional pharmacy education and workforce development. Pharmacy Education supports Open Access (OA): free, unrestricted online access to research outputs. Readers are able to access the Journal and individual published articles for free - there are no subscription fees or ''pay per view'' charges. Authors wishing to publish their work in Pharmacy Education do so without incurring any financial costs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信