Grace Marley , Jill E. Lavigne , Wendi Cross , Abigail Gamble , Zhuying Zhang , Delesha M. Carpenter
{"title":"比较三种评估药房员工自杀预防培训项目学习成果的方法","authors":"Grace Marley , Jill E. Lavigne , Wendi Cross , Abigail Gamble , Zhuying Zhang , Delesha M. Carpenter","doi":"10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100348","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To examine whether pharmacists and pharmacy staff who complete a suicide prevention gatekeeper training program (Pharm-SAVES) react similarly to a written patient case, a live simulated patient (SP), and a prerecorded SP case.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>After completing the 30-min Pharm-SAVES training, participants completed a written patient case via survey and then, 1 month later, completed a prerecorded SP and live SP interaction via Zoom. For each assessment type, we documented whether the participant asked about suicide and referred the patient to the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline (988).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants (<em>n</em> = 12) asked about suicide in 8 (67 %) written patient cases, 9 (75 %) prerecorded SP cases, and 8 (67 %) live SP cases. Participants referred patients to 988 in 8 (67 %) written patient cases, 5 (42 %) prerecorded SP cases, and 10 (83 %) live SP cases.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The number of participants who asked about suicide was similar regardless of assessment type; however, referrals to the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline happened less often with the prerecorded SP cases.</div></div><div><h3>Innovation</h3><div>This is the first study to compare key learning outcomes of pharmacy suicide prevention gatekeeper training across written, live, and prerecorded SP encounters.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74407,"journal":{"name":"PEC innovation","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing three methods to assess learning outcomes for a suicide prevention training program for pharmacy staff\",\"authors\":\"Grace Marley , Jill E. Lavigne , Wendi Cross , Abigail Gamble , Zhuying Zhang , Delesha M. Carpenter\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pecinn.2024.100348\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To examine whether pharmacists and pharmacy staff who complete a suicide prevention gatekeeper training program (Pharm-SAVES) react similarly to a written patient case, a live simulated patient (SP), and a prerecorded SP case.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>After completing the 30-min Pharm-SAVES training, participants completed a written patient case via survey and then, 1 month later, completed a prerecorded SP and live SP interaction via Zoom. For each assessment type, we documented whether the participant asked about suicide and referred the patient to the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline (988).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants (<em>n</em> = 12) asked about suicide in 8 (67 %) written patient cases, 9 (75 %) prerecorded SP cases, and 8 (67 %) live SP cases. Participants referred patients to 988 in 8 (67 %) written patient cases, 5 (42 %) prerecorded SP cases, and 10 (83 %) live SP cases.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The number of participants who asked about suicide was similar regardless of assessment type; however, referrals to the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline happened less often with the prerecorded SP cases.</div></div><div><h3>Innovation</h3><div>This is the first study to compare key learning outcomes of pharmacy suicide prevention gatekeeper training across written, live, and prerecorded SP encounters.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74407,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PEC innovation\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PEC innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628224000967\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PEC innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628224000967","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing three methods to assess learning outcomes for a suicide prevention training program for pharmacy staff
Objective
To examine whether pharmacists and pharmacy staff who complete a suicide prevention gatekeeper training program (Pharm-SAVES) react similarly to a written patient case, a live simulated patient (SP), and a prerecorded SP case.
Methods
After completing the 30-min Pharm-SAVES training, participants completed a written patient case via survey and then, 1 month later, completed a prerecorded SP and live SP interaction via Zoom. For each assessment type, we documented whether the participant asked about suicide and referred the patient to the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline (988).
Results
Participants (n = 12) asked about suicide in 8 (67 %) written patient cases, 9 (75 %) prerecorded SP cases, and 8 (67 %) live SP cases. Participants referred patients to 988 in 8 (67 %) written patient cases, 5 (42 %) prerecorded SP cases, and 10 (83 %) live SP cases.
Conclusion
The number of participants who asked about suicide was similar regardless of assessment type; however, referrals to the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline happened less often with the prerecorded SP cases.
Innovation
This is the first study to compare key learning outcomes of pharmacy suicide prevention gatekeeper training across written, live, and prerecorded SP encounters.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
