Foundation pharmacists’ experiences of personal development whilst undertaking the nes post-registration foundation programme: a qualitative study (Scotland)

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The NES post-registration Foundation Programme1 for pharmacists introduced in 1989, has recently been extended to primary-care and community sectors. The programme, approximately two years in duration, is based on a competency framework (six core elements & 2 sector specific). Foundation pharmacists (FPs) are assigned a tutor, have 6 monthly appraisals, and are assessed by an e-portfolio and OSCE. Aim The aim of this paper is to describe FPs’ experiences and personal development when undertaking the Programme. This study is part of larger mixed methods evaluation of the Programme. Methods Eligible participants were pharmacists registering with the programme in September 2017/February 2018. NES staff sent emails inviting them to take part in either a focus group or interview (face-to-face or virtual) at baseline, mid-point, and-programme completion, to explore their expectations and experiences of the programme. Proceedings were digitally recorded, transcribed, and managed using NVivo. Analysis was inductive and thematic2 and synthesised in relation to Bandura’s Social Cognitive theory3 (SCT) which posits that learning and knowledge enhancement are related to interaction between environmental, person/cognitive, and behavioural factors. Facilitators and barriers to undertaking the Programme were identified. IRAS advised ethical approval was not required; NHS Research & Development approval was given. Results Ninety-six pharmacists registered for the Programme. In total 22 participated in 7 baseline focus groups, 7 in 2 midway focus group/3 in interviews, and 4 in end-of-programme interviews. At baseline environmental factors predominated in motivation to undertake the Programme such as the structured approach and robust support network (tutors, peers & NES). These also contributed to the perceived facilitators for programme completion. Conversely environmental factors linked to the external working environment could also be barriers. Person/cognitive factors were other motivators to undertaking the Programme because of perceived improved employability, and benefits of increased confidence. Finally, the behavioural domain also contributed to motivation with perceptions of benefits in both transferable and clinical skills. At midway, pharmacists confirmed their improvements in both the personal/cognitive domain (confidence, resilience, reflective practice) and the behavioural domain of clinical and transferable skills. Facilitators (support & resources) and barriers (lack of support, time, and feedback) were almost exclusively environmental. Comments around professional identity also emerged inextricably linked to FPs’ relationships with and recognition by other members of the HCP team. At programme end the views from the midway point remain unchanged. Perceived skills had increased largely in the behavioural domain but also in the person/cognitive domain with understanding the value of reflective practice emerging as a key area of improvement and being reported as influencing professional identity. Facilitators were solely reported in terms of environmental factors relating to extensive support networks and barriers again related to environmental factors which included lack of support, resources, and external influences. Views of the programme overall were very positive Discussion/Conclusion All three SCT factors influenced the learning and development of the FPs, but environmental influences dominated the barriers. As a qualitative study these results cannot be generalised, but they highlight areas to explore in more details for future programme delivery.