ALFP Debate: Pharmacy Practice Needs Pharmacy Schools to Drive Innovation in the Profession

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

ObjectiveTo describe the pros and cons of the topic “pharmacy practice needs pharmacy schools to drive innovation in the profession.” MethodsThe Academic Leadership Fellows Program (ALFP) contributes to developing leaders in the academy. ALFP Fellows participate in a debate on current topics in academic pharmacy. Cohort 19 Pro- and Con-Teams of the “innovation” debate separately conducted literature searches including terms “innovation, pharmacy/clinical practice, drivers,” and accessed information from multiple national pharmacy organizations, and expert opinion from faculty, association members, and practitioners. ResultsThe Pro- and Con-Teams each had three central conclusions. The Pro-Team proposed first that pharmacy schools prepare future pharmacists to be life-long learners and change-agents. Second, pharmacy schools have resources/expertise to engage in innovation. Third, seminal partnerships such as the Academia-CPESN Transformation Pharmacy Collaborative, are crucial for innovations to be successful. The Con-Team proposed first that successful and usable practice innovations include a business model built on the innovation being feasible and sustainable. Second, ACPE 2016 standards suggest pharmacy schools are facilitators of innovation, not drivers, because they are not expected to train students to develop innovative practices. Third, academic pharmacy is often reactive to practice, not proactive. Innovative topics are rarely taught in schools due to lack of academic experts, heavy workloads, and other challenges. ConclusionsPharmacy schools and practice do not operate independently nor innovate separately. The first priority of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy’s Strategic Plan is to lead the transformation of pharmacy practice. Representatives of practice and academia must work together to foster this culture of transformation by seeking, developing, implementing, and evaluating progressive, contemporary, and innovative ideas and practices that reflect the shared perspectives of both entities.