非医疗处方和药学学生跨专业处方安全研讨会:一项横断面研究。

S. Hemingway, M. Culshaw, J. Stephenson
{"title":"非医疗处方和药学学生跨专业处方安全研讨会:一项横断面研究。","authors":"S. Hemingway, M. Culshaw, J. Stephenson","doi":"10.5920/bjpharm.659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reports on an evaluation of a prescribing workshop to increase ‘sharedlearning’ between registered practitioners undertaking a non-medicalprescribing (NMP) course (midwifery, nursing, physiotherapy, and podiatry) andundergraduate pharmacy students to increase awareness of, and understanding of theroles.  The focus was on three domains ofsafe prescribing: Knowledge (of commonly prescribed medicines and theirsuitability for individual patients); Process (of legal requirements and supplyof medicines and associated patient information); and Relationships (betweenprescribers and pharmacists). A cross-sectional evaluation was utilized with6-point Likert-style items and a free text section, completed by 337participants.  Participants reported positivelyabout the workshop content and their learning experience, although somedifferences between pharmacy and NMP participants were noted in the knowledgedomain. Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences (p<0.001) oflow-to-moderate magnitude (partial-2=0.146) between NMP and Pharmacy studenton all 3 domains, with NMP students reporting slightly more positive outcomes(between 0.4 and 1.5 points higher) in all cases. However, both groups scoredpositively; with mean domain scores of 15.6 to 16.5 on scales with maximumscores of 18.","PeriodicalId":9253,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Pharmacy","volume":"58 2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inter-professional prescription safety workshop for non-medical prescribing and pharmacy students: A cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"S. Hemingway, M. Culshaw, J. Stephenson\",\"doi\":\"10.5920/bjpharm.659\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reports on an evaluation of a prescribing workshop to increase ‘sharedlearning’ between registered practitioners undertaking a non-medicalprescribing (NMP) course (midwifery, nursing, physiotherapy, and podiatry) andundergraduate pharmacy students to increase awareness of, and understanding of theroles.  The focus was on three domains ofsafe prescribing: Knowledge (of commonly prescribed medicines and theirsuitability for individual patients); Process (of legal requirements and supplyof medicines and associated patient information); and Relationships (betweenprescribers and pharmacists). A cross-sectional evaluation was utilized with6-point Likert-style items and a free text section, completed by 337participants.  Participants reported positivelyabout the workshop content and their learning experience, although somedifferences between pharmacy and NMP participants were noted in the knowledgedomain. Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences (p<0.001) oflow-to-moderate magnitude (partial-2=0.146) between NMP and Pharmacy studenton all 3 domains, with NMP students reporting slightly more positive outcomes(between 0.4 and 1.5 points higher) in all cases. However, both groups scoredpositively; with mean domain scores of 15.6 to 16.5 on scales with maximumscores of 18.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9253,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Pharmacy\",\"volume\":\"58 2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5920/bjpharm.659\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5920/bjpharm.659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文报告了一个处方研讨会的评估,以增加参加非医疗处方(NMP)课程(助产学,护理学,物理治疗和足病)的注册从业者和本科药学学生之间的“共享学习”,以提高对角色的认识和理解。重点是安全处方的三个领域:知识(常用处方药及其对个体患者的适用性);流程(法律要求和药品供应以及相关患者信息);以及关系(开处方者和药剂师之间)。横断面评估采用6点李克特式项目和自由文本部分,由337名参与者完成。参与者对研讨会的内容和他们的学习经历进行了积极的报告,尽管药学和NMP参与者在知识领域存在一些差异。定量分析显示,NMP和药学学生在所有三个领域之间存在中低量级(部分- 2=0.146)的显著差异(p<0.001), NMP学生在所有情况下报告的积极结果略高(高出0.4至1.5分)。然而,两组的得分都是正的;平均领域得分为15.6至16.5分,满分为18分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inter-professional prescription safety workshop for non-medical prescribing and pharmacy students: A cross-sectional study.
This article reports on an evaluation of a prescribing workshop to increase ‘sharedlearning’ between registered practitioners undertaking a non-medicalprescribing (NMP) course (midwifery, nursing, physiotherapy, and podiatry) andundergraduate pharmacy students to increase awareness of, and understanding of theroles.  The focus was on three domains ofsafe prescribing: Knowledge (of commonly prescribed medicines and theirsuitability for individual patients); Process (of legal requirements and supplyof medicines and associated patient information); and Relationships (betweenprescribers and pharmacists). A cross-sectional evaluation was utilized with6-point Likert-style items and a free text section, completed by 337participants.  Participants reported positivelyabout the workshop content and their learning experience, although somedifferences between pharmacy and NMP participants were noted in the knowledgedomain. Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences (p<0.001) oflow-to-moderate magnitude (partial-2=0.146) between NMP and Pharmacy studenton all 3 domains, with NMP students reporting slightly more positive outcomes(between 0.4 and 1.5 points higher) in all cases. However, both groups scoredpositively; with mean domain scores of 15.6 to 16.5 on scales with maximumscores of 18.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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