Accreditation Council For Pharmacy Education Research Articles

Annual Report of the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education

This is the 82nd annual report of the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). This report summarizes ACPE's activities covering the period January 23, 2012 to January 21, 2013, and is available to the profession and to the general public. In 2012, the ACPE Board and Staff successfully

Self-Authorship in Pharmacy Education

The theory of self-authorship describes the developmental process students undergo in the transition away from dependence on authority figures for learning and identity. Self-authored individuals are also capable of self-directed learning, critical thinking, complex problem-solving, mature decision-making, and the development of collaborative relationships with diverse others. According to this theory, an individual's transformation to self-authorship is not instantaneous but occurs over time, and that college experiences can be designed to promote development of self-authorship. The Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) encourages the use of innovative instructional methods that "enable students to transition from dependent to active, self-directed, lifelong learners."(1) The developmental theory of self-authorship is a theory of cognitive and affective growth that could help pharmacy educators better examine and define the role of academia in the holistic professional development of pharmacy students. The Learning Partnerships Model, which is based on the theory of self-authorship, describes a student-centered approach to pharmacy education that promotes self-authorship.

Interprofessional Education: Fad or Imperative

Interprofessional Education: Fad or Imperative

Summary of the ACPE Consensus Conference on Advancing Quality in Pharmacy Education

INTRODUCTION This is a summary of a consensus-seeking invitational conference convened by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), September 12-14, 2012, in Atlanta, Georgia. The two objectives of the conference were to advise the ACPE Board of Directors on how to ensure that the standards, guidelines, and accreditation process for Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) programs are aligned with (1) current and future competency requirements of pharmacists and (2) evidence-based practices in assessing student learning and the quality of educational programs. As ACPE begins the process of revising the standards for PharmD education in 2013, it will be guided by the findings and recommendations from the conference. This article describes the organization of the conference and summarizes presentations at the program. Companion articles discuss the recommendations of the conference (1) and ACPE's plans for using those recommendations in the standards-revision process. (2) Two other articles cover complementary activities that were used in planning the conference: the results of preconference surveys and reports of three task forces that outlined employer expectations of new pharmacy graduates. (3,4) INVITED PARTICIPANTS Of the 90 invited conference participants (not counting the 11 participants from the ACPE staff and conference support staff), about half were from pharmacy practice and half from pharmacy education. The ACPE strived for balance among the invitees; for example, between deans and faculty members, among representatives of different types and sizes of educational institutions, and among practitioners from various types of practice settings. Appendix 1 describes how participants were selected. Appendix 2 is a roster of the individuals who attended. CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION In advance of the meeting, the ACPE surveyed invited participants and other stakeholders on issues related to the conference objectives. (3) The survey results guided the ACPE in selecting the specific issues to focus on at the conference. In advance of the meeting, many invitees participated in an ACPE webinar that provided an orientation to the program. All participants were encouraged to review in advance the results of the preconference surveys and several articles and documents related to the objectives of the conference that were on an ACPE SharePoint[R] collaboration site that was Internet accessible. For each of the 2 objectives of the conference, plenary sessions consisting of invited presentations and discussions were followed by small-group sessions in which conferees drafted recommendations related to the conference objective. At the end of the program, conference participants rated all the recommendations in terms of impact and feasibility. Throughout the conference, the ACPE disseminated summaries of the proceedings via Twitter and Facebook[R] postings. The conference was funded primarily by ACPE, supplemented by grant support from 5 organizations (see Acknowledgements). Most invited participants had their institutions cover their expenses for traveling to the conference. The following sections summarize the conference's lectures and panel discussions, which highlighted issues and perspectives that were considered by conferees in formulating recommendations. [An audio recording of each lecture or panel discussion may be accessed at the following Web address: https://www.acpe-accredit.org/ deans/invitationalconference.asp; also at that site are PowerPoint[R] slides and supplemental information prepared by speakers.] THE STATUS QUO IS NOT AN OPTION Robert S. Beardsley, PhD, President of ACPE, opened the conference by explaining why ACPE convened the conference, pointing to the rate of change in health care, the evolving patient-care roles of pharmacists, and the growth of interprofessional practice models in health care. …

Employer Expectations of New Pharmacy Graduates: Implications for the Pharmacy Degree Accreditation Standards

As part of its assessment of the professional degree accreditation standards in pharmacy, the Board of Directors of the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) desired feedback from employers of new graduates. Specifically, the Board wished to understand what employers from the most

A Consumer Advocate’s Perspective on Pharmacist Competencies and Pharmacy Education

This is a transcription of an interview with Linda Golodner, President Emeritus of the National Consumers League (NCL), conducted for the purpose of bringing the views of a prominent consumer advocate to the attention of participants in the September 2012 conference by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. The interview was conducted on April 10, 2012, by William Zellmer, ACPE conference-planning consultant. The transcription has been edited for clarity. Linda Golodner served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of NCL from 1985 to 2007. She now consults with government, nonprofit, and for-profit organizations on consumer issues. She has focused her career on corporate social responsibility, fair labor standards, and ethical behavior in the marketplace. Her numerous awards and recognitions include the Hugo G. Schaefer Award of the American Pharmacists Association. Familiarity with Pharmacy-Related Issues William Zellmer (WZ): Linda, to what extent in your career as a consumer advocate have you been engaged with pharmacy-related issues? Linda Golodner (LG): When I became executive director of the National Consumers League (NCL) in 1985, the organization already had a history of advocating for patient package inserts for prescription medicines. Many consumers put high value on the accessibility of the pharmacist for health care questions. Pharmacists have a big role in advising consumers on the use of over-the-counter medicines. In many respects, pharmacists are closer to consumers than other health professionals. I often worked with pharmacists on consumer issues. Through my involvement with the National Council on Patient Information and Education (NCPIE), I had an opportunity to discuss with the leaders of pharmacy associations their interest in pharmaceutical care and their concerns about ensuring that consumers understand the medicines they are taking. I also worked with the Food and Drug Administration on these issues. During the health care reform initiative of the Clinton Administration, I represented the NCL on a coalition of organizations that advocated with Congress for coverage of pharmacist services. Standards for Health Professional Education WZ: Please describe your current involvement with issues related to standards for health professional education. LG: I serve on the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME), which is the accrediting authority for medical education programs leading to the MD degree in the United States and Canada. I'm also a public member of the National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants (NCCPA), and I serve as a public member of the Dental Assisting National Board (DANB). For the latter two groups, which deal with credentialing practitioners rather than accrediting educational programs, I chair committees that review cases of apparent lapses in the quality of care provided by practitioners. I also chair the policy committee for DANB. WZ: Related to your work with LCME, do you have any thoughts about issues in accreditation that are relevant broadly throughout the health professions, or any that might be notably applicable to pharmacy education? LG: A couple of areas come to mind. One is diversity. The medical profession is looking at the diversity of students and of faculties based on concern that the profession does not reflect the diversity of the country's population. I suspect this might be an issue in pharmacy, too. Student indebtedness is an issue. It's important for students to understand the financial burden they will have upon graduation related to their student loans. They need counseling in this regard. And they need scholarship support--a portion of tuition revenue should be made available for scholarships. LCME is very interested in interdisciplinary learning--a team approach in the learning environment that carries over into team work in professional practice, doctors working with pharmacists, working with nurses, working with nutritionists. …

Development and Evaluation of a Pharmacogenomics Educational Program for Pharmacists

Objectives. To evaluate hospital and outpatient pharmacists' pharmacogenomics knowledge before and 2 months after participating in a targeted, case-based pharmacogenomics continuing education program.Design. As part of a continuing education program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), pharmacists were provided with a fundamental pharmacogenomics education program.Evaluation. An 11-question, multiple-choice, electronic survey instrument was distributed to 272 eligible pharmacists at a single campus of a large, academic healthcare system. Pharmacists improved their pharmacogenomics test scores by 0.7 questions (pretest average 46%; posttest average 53%, p=0.0003).Conclusions. Although pharmacists demonstrated improvement, overall retention of educational goals and objectives was marginal. These results suggest that the complex topic of pharmacogenomics requires a large educational effort in order to increase pharmacists' knowledge and comfort level with this emerging therapeutic opportunity.

Student pharmacists' perspective on actual vs. simulated pharmacy practice experiences

The value of experiential education and its importance in the development of the student pharmacist is acknowledged by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). In June 2010, the ACPE adopted a policy allowing colleges of pharmacy to replace up to 20% of introductory pharmacy practice experiences (e.g., 60h) with simulated activities. As third professional-year student pharmacists, we recognize the importance of simulated experiences and their strategic placement throughout the curriculum. Simulated patient encounters are important bridges that assist in preparing student pharmacists for future patient-centered practice. Although a valuable teaching tool, simulated patient encounters lack an element of reality. In this manuscript, we describe how a unique experience in our second professional year, focused solely on a real-world patient-care experience, accelerated our professional growth and patient-care skills. We gained several valuable insights through this real-world patient-care experience including a change in our approach to simulated experiences, an enhanced perspective on therapeutic course work, and an increased value on patient-centered care. Although there are challenges for emerging pharmacy schools to establish new experiential education sites for students, we encourage colleges of pharmacy to overcome the challenges by creating new and innovative alternative direct patient-care opportunities. A patient-centered pharmacy curriculum that facilitates learning in a real-world environment should be available to every student pharmacist.

Investigational drug service advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE)

Although the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) and the American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) provide standards and guidelines for required APPEs (community pharmacy, hospital or health system pharmacy, inpatient/acute care general medicine, and ambulatory care) and there are some published descriptions of other elective APPEs, there is little information regarding the provision of an elective APPE focusing on Investigational drug service (IDS) and/or clinical research. The purpose of this paper is to describe the IDS APPE that was developed by the University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) IDS pharmacists in conjunction with the University of Michigan College of Pharmacy (UM COP). The IDS APPE is a four-week full-time program consisting of interaction with various IDS team members, topic discussions, opportunities for writing, and participation in IDS operations. Each week of the IDS APPE features a specific central theme, which includes both discussion topics and hands-on activities. While IDS practices may vary in size and scope, they all fulfill core regulatory requirements related to management of drugs used in clinical trials. Therefore, the IDS APPE description can be adapted and applied to other IDS practices in an effort to provide structure and foundation to the education of pharmacy students on an IDS APPE rotation. Further, it can be adapted into a general clinical research rotation with emphasis on the role of the pharmacist in the management of clinical trials and conduction of research for institutions that do not have a dedicated pharmacy service for clinical research (i.e., IDS).

Developing a Professionalism Plan

Professionalism is a way of being which underlies all the responsibilities of a pharmacist and associated general and professional abilities. The Student Affairs Committee was charged with developing a college-wide professionalism plan to meet the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) Standards 15.1 and 23. This plan was developed concurrently with a new curriculum. The plan was developed systematically with the following goals: 1) create a definition of professionalism, 2) determine outcomes of the plan, 3) identify existing components which should be continued and new components to be added, 4) ensure existing and new components are linked to outcomes and 5) develop a continuous assessment process for the plan. The proposed plan consists of curricular, co-curricular and extra-curricular activities designed to help students gain experience in three professionalism pillars: Competence, Connection and Character, as defined by Brown et al in "Taxonomy of Professionalism". While knowledge and skills will be enhanced, the focus of development will be on student virtues, values and attitudesäóîthat what they do defines who they are. The goal is to help students develop as people and professionals who value the high ideals expected of a pharmacist.
 
 Type: Idea Paper

Physician Competence in Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Grading of Peripheral Neuropathy in Multiple Myeloma

AbstractAbstract 4702Treatment-induced peripheral neuropathy (PN) remains a clinical challenge in the management of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). A number of strategies have been developed to prevent the condition including modifications to dose, schedule, or mode of administration of PN-causing agents or selection of alternative active agents with reduced PN risk. Given the increasing number of options to reduce or mitigate PN, recognition of symptoms and appropriate grading is important to manage the toxicity and prevent cumulative or irreversible PN. An independent certified education series focusing on proteasome inhibition in MM, including associated toxicities and management, was conducted at hospitals, medical centers, cancer centers, medical practices, and community dinner venues throughout the United States. From April 2011 to January 2012, 51 live 1-hour education activities presented by respected leaders in the MM field were implemented in accordance with the essential areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) and Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). The target audience for this program was hematologists, hematologist-oncologists, medical oncologists, oncology specialty pharmacists, and allied healthcare professionals charged with the care of patients with MM. The program educated 999 healthcare professionals including 553 physicians. Of the 553 physicians, 309 (56%) listed specialties that fell within the target audience. Practitioner knowledge, competence, and confidence were assessed via case vignettes prior to and immediately following each educational activity using an audience response system. Case vignette surveys completed 6 weeks following each activity evaluated practitioner performance. Practice gaps were identified through comparison of current best practices versus actual participant responses. Competence in CTCAE grading was assessed with a case vignette containing PN symptoms. Participants were asked to select the grade of PN from multiple choice answers of grades 1 through 5. Participation by the target physician audience in the assessment included 177 prior to the education, 176 after the education, and 54 at 6-weeks following the activity. The baseline grading gap for the physician target audience was 45%. Immediately following the education, there was a 30% improvement yielding a remaining practice gap of only 15%. However, educational erosion for PN CTCAE grading at 6 weeks was 24%, yielding only a 6% improvement over baseline and suggesting the majority of practitioners did not retain PN grading competency. Baseline, knowledge and competence gaps for all other assessments ranged from 32% to 68% and were reduced immediately following the education and at 6 weeks following the activity. While some educational erosion did take place at 6-weeks in other areas, it only ranged from 9% to 10% compared to 24% erosion for PN grading. Overall, physician knowledge, competence, and confidence were improved by this educational series. However, for CTCAE grading of PN, there was increased educational erosion suggesting a need for serial education to reinforce physician awareness of current grading criteria. Disclosures:Fagerlie:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding. Heintz:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding. Haas:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding. Stacy:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding.

Influence of Continuing Medical Education On the Utilization of Combined Proteasome Inhibitor/Immunomodulatory Agent Induction Therapy and Cytogenetic Information for Multiple Myeloma by US Healthcare Professionals

AbstractAbstract 4707Over the past 15 years, optimal treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) has undergone dramatic changes. Novel therapies have led to unprecedented response rates and improved survival. Active therapies are now being combined with good efficacy; however, combination therapy often alters the toxicity profile as well as therapy options at relapse. Because there are a number of active regimens for newly diagnosed MM, healthcare professionals must stay abreast of the most current information in order to make optimal patient care decisions. An interactive, case-based education series focusing on MM treatment was conducted at hospitals, medical centers, cancer centers, medical practices, and community dinner venues throughout the United States. The target audience for this program was hematologists, hematologist-oncologists, medical oncologists, oncology specialty pharmacists, and allied healthcare professionals charged with the care of patients with MM. From April 2010 to November 2011, 94 live 1-hour education activities were implemented in accordance with the essential areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) and Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). After the initial 69 activities, which educated 1360 healthcare professionals including 809 physicians, outcomes assessments were expanded. The remaining 25 activities reached 440 healthcare providers including 256 physicians. Practice pattern, knowledge, and competence were assessed via case vignettes prior to and immediately following each educational activity using an audience response system. Case vignette surveys completed 6 weeks following each activity evaluated practitioner performance. The median number of responses per question for the first 69 activities was 413 at baseline, 223 immediately following each activity, and 44 at 6 weeks. For a young ISS stage III patient with few comorbidities and normal cytogenetics, practitioners favored induction therapy combining a proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory agent, with 56% of practitioners selecting either a thalidomide/bortezomib- or lenalidomide/bortezomib-based regimen at baseline. Preference for combination therapy increased after the educational activity to 75% (+19% shift). The majority favored a bortezomib/lenalidomide-based treatment plan (45% at baseline and 67% post-education). Subgroup analysis found a similar trend for the physician target audience with 45% of physicians at baseline and 67% immediately following the education selecting a lenalidomide/bortezomib-based regimen. Follow-up at 6 weeks found 68% of respondents opted for a combined regimen. For the final 25 activities, the case vignette was altered from normal cytogenetics to t(4;14), and participants were asked a series of questions on cytogenetics and MM treatment. For the t(4;14) patient, baseline use of a combined lenalidomide/bortezomib regimen was similar to the first 69 activities (48% for total audience, 49% for physicians). Upon education 84% of the total audience and 76% of physician opted for a lenalidomide/bortezomib-based regimen. The majority of practitioners (81% of the total audience and 82% of physicians) reported that cytogenetic information affected their treatment approach, and 94% were able to identify high-risk cytogenetics. When asked to select induction therapy for an elderly transplant-ineligible MM patient with comorbidities, there was little consensus and education did not result in a significant change in practice pattern. The most commonly identified barrier to applying activity content into clinical practice was treatment side effects. Overall, these data suggest that among community practitioners, combination induction therapy with a proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory agent is preferred for a young transplant eligible patient and cytogenetic information is being incorporated into treatment selection. Education of current data impacts treatment selection, increasing the number of practitioners selecting combination therapy. Treatment of frail elderly patients remains a challenge. Practice patterns varied for elderly MM before and after the educational activity. Participants identified treatment side effects as the most common barrier, and further education on the management of these side effects, especially in elderly MM, is needed. Disclosures:Fagerlie:Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding. Heintz:Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding. Haas:Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding. Stacy:Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding.

Injectable administration privileges among pharmacists in the United States

Privileges for administering nonvaccine injectable medications among pharmacists in the United States were assessed. An e-mail inquiry on specific protocols for the administration of injectables was sent to the state boards of pharmacy (BOPs) for all 50 states and the District of Columbia that had a valid e-mail address listed on the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy website. Respondents were encouraged to include in their response a link to state regulations so that information from the BOP laws on privileges for administering injectables could be closely reviewed. State guidelines were reviewed online for all BOPs that did not respond to the first e-mail in order to complete the study. A follow-up e-mail was sent only to those respondents whose states granted pharmacists privileges for administering nonvaccine injectables in order to clarify the specific drugs allowed to be injected by pharmacists. Responses received included either links to state regulations or explicit statements of the rules regarding pharmacists' injectable privileges. A total of 21 states currently grant pharmacists articulate written information or rules pertaining to the privilege of administering nonvaccine injectable products. Authority is provided through collaborative practice agreements for most states. Products administered by pharmacists vary by state. Pharmacists in 21 states were found to have privileges for administering injectable medications other than vaccines. Pharmacists were authorized to administer these drugs through completion of training approved by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education, collaborative practice agreements, valid prescription orders, board certification, or other broad privileges as specified in state regulations.

Integrate Health Promotion Concepts into Pharmacy Education: Experience and Tools for the Pharmacy Curriculum

Transnational Pharmacy Education – A Global Overview C. Anderson, I. Bates, T. Brock, A. Brown, A. Bruno, B. Futter, D. Gal, T. Rennie, M. Rouse, School of Pharmacy, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, FIP Collaborating Centre, UCL School of Pharmacy, United Kingdom, School of Pharmacy, University of California, San Francisco, United States, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Australia, Rhodes University, South Africa, International Pharmaceutical Federation Education initiatives (FIPEd), University of Namibia, Namibia, Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education, United States

Improving Care Transitions: Current Practice and Future Opportunities for Pharmacists

During the past decade, patient safety issues during care transitions have gained greater attention at both the local and national level. Readmission rates to U.S. hospitals are high, often because of poor care transitions. Serious adverse drug events (ADEs) caused by an incomplete understanding of changes in complex drug regimens can be an important factor contributing to readmission rates. This paper describes the roles and responsibilities of pharmacists in ensuring optimal outcomes from drug therapy during care transitions. Barriers to effective care transitions, including inadequate communication, poor care coordination, and the lack of one clinician ultimately responsible for these transitions, are discussed. This paper also identifies specific patient populations at high risk of ADEs during care transitions. Several national initiatives and newer care transition models are discussed, including multi- and interdisciplinary programs with pharmacists as key members. Among their potential roles, pharmacists should participate on medical rounds where available, perform medication reconciliation and admission drug histories, apply their knowledge of drug therapy to anticipate and resolve problems during transitions, communicate changes in drug regimens between providers and care settings, assess the appropriateness and patient understanding of drug regimens, promote adherence, and assess health literacy. In addition, this paper identifies barriers and ongoing challenges limiting greater involvement of pharmacists from different practice settings during care transitions. Professional degree programs and residency training programs should increase their emphasis on pharmacists' roles, especially as part of interdisciplinary teams, in improving patient safety during care transitions in diverse practice settings. This paper also recommends that Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) standards include specific language regarding the exposure of students to issues regarding care transitions and that students have several opportunities to practice the skills needed for effective care transitions. Moreover, reimbursement mechanisms that permit greater pharmacist involvement in providing medication assistance to patients going through care transitions should be explored. Although health information technology offers the potential for safer care transitions, pharmacists' use of information technology must be integrated into the national initiatives for pharmacists to be effectively involved in care transitions. This paper concludes with a discussion about the importance of recognizing and addressing health literacy issues to promote patient empowerment during and after care transitions.

Maintaining Pharmacy Education’s Research Focus as the Academy Expands

In 2006, dean William H. Campbell made the following observations: For academic programs to provide quality professional instruction, full-time faculty must be actively engaged in in the pharmaceutical sciences...Faculty who cannot participate in expanding the body of knowledge required by practice and science cannot be expected to provide mastery level instruction to pharmacy students. Demonstration of active engagement in the pharmaceutical sciences must include extramural support, scholarly publication, scientific presentations, and supervision of graduate (masters, PhD, postdoctoral) students... (1) The authors agree with this assessment. Indeed, in crafting Standards 2007, (2) the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE), through stakeholder feedback, listed and as one of 12 areas that were emphasized in the revision process. There are different forms of scholarship, (3) with (or the scholarship of discovery) being just one. In Standards 2007, the relevant section is Standard 25 (Faculty and Staff), guideline 8, which reads: Faculty should generate and disseminate knowledge through Scholarship by faculty members, including the scholarship of teaching, must be evident and demonstrated by productive and other scholarly activities, such as contributions to the scientific, professional, and educational literature; publication of books and review articles; and successes in securing extramural funding to support and other scholarly activities. Although the standard may seem straightforward, it could be interpreted in different ways: from non-research forms of scholarship (eg, review papers); to alternate forms of scholarship not necessarily associated with publication, such as the scholarship of application (ie, clinical practice) or the scholarship of engagement (ie, public service); to the traditional currency of in colleges and schools of pharmacy, with benchmarks such as competitive federal funding and subsequent peer-reviewed publications of original work in visible, high-impact journals. The authors do not wish to minimize the importance of scholarship, broadly defined (3); all forms of scholarly contribution within colleges and schools of pharmacy are clearly important. Nevertheless, what we are most concerned with, and is the subject of this statement, is the latter form of scholarship, defined by Boyer (3) as the scholarship of discovery. The report of the 2003-2004 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Research and Graduate Affairs Committee (4) noted an increasing concern about the potential diminution of the academy's collective scholarship, particularly in the area of the scholarship of discovery, because of the increasing numbers of new pharmacy programs at institutions with an unknown culture of scholarship. Eight years after that report, it is now possible to objectively describe the cohort of newer colleges with regard to their emphasis on and to preliminarily discern if this committee's concerns were well founded. For the purposes of this paper, we compared the new colleges and schools of pharmacy (those that admitted students during or after the year 2000) and the older colleges from the AACP Web site (5) list of members with respect to their focus. There are 45 colleges and schools of pharmacy that first admitted students during or after the year 2000 and 79 colleges in the pre-2000 group. Of the newer colleges and schools, 10 of the 45 have research as a stated part of their mission (though many more mention scholarship). Most are not associated with academic health centers, (6) which are great sources of interdisciplinary education and also provide access to patients for research, non-pharmacy collaborators, and a culture of translational and discovery. …

Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education: Annual Report

In vivo anti-polysaccharide Ig responses to isolated polysaccharide (PS) are T cell independent, rapid, and fail to generate memory. However, little is known regarding PS-specific Ig responses to intact Gram-positive and Gram-negative extracellular bacteria. We previously demonstrated that intact heat-killed <i>Streptococcus pneumoniae</i>, a Gram-positive bacterium, elicited a rapid primary pneumococcal capsular PS (PPS) response in mice that was dependent on CD4⁺ T cells, B7-dependent costimulation, and CD40–CD40L interactions. However, this response was ICOS independent and failed to generate a boosted PPS-specific secondary IgG response. In the current study, we analyzed the murine meningococcal type C PS (MCPS)-specific Ig response to i.p.-injected intact, heat-killed <i>Neisseria meningitidis</i>, serogroup C (MenC), a Gram-negative bacterium. In contrast to <i>S. pneumoniae</i>, the IgG anti-MCPS response to MenC exhibited delayed primary kinetics and was highly boosted after secondary immunization, whereas the IgG anti-MCPS response to isolated MCPS was rapid, without secondary boosting, and consisted of only IgG1 and IgG3, as opposed to all four IgG isotypes in response to intact MenC. The secondary, but not primary, IgG anti-MCPS response to MenC was dependent on CD4⁺ T cells, CD40L, CD28, and ICOS. The primary and secondary IgG anti-MCPS responses were lower in TLR4-defective (C3H/HeJ) but not TLR2^−/− or MyD88^−/− mice, but secondary boosting was still observed. Of interest, coimmunization of <i>S. pneumoniae</i> and MenC resulted in a boosted secondary IgG anti-PPS response to <i>S. pneumoniae</i>. Our data demonstrate that the nature of the in vivo anti-PS response is markedly influenced by the composition and/or architecture of the bacterial subcapsular domain.

Interprofessional education accreditation standards in the USA: A comparative analysis

Interprofessional education (IPE) and interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP) will play a prominent role in the future of health professions' education and healthcare delivery in the USA and internationally. To assess the accreditation mandate for IPE in the USA, content analysis of IPE-related accreditation statements for all practice-level degrees in dentistry, medicine, nursing, occupational therapy, pharmacy, physical therapy, physician assistant, psychology, public health and social work was performed. Eighteen keywords were used to locate potentially relevant IPE statements within each accreditation document. Identified statements were independently categorized by each author into one of three mutually exclusive categories: accountable, non-accountable or non-applicable (κ = 0.79; 95% CI 0.69–0.89). Eighteen of 21 accreditation documents analyzed contained applicable IPE statements. The Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education and Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education documents contained 77% (46/60) of accountable IPE statements. Two-thirds (14/21) of documents contained two or fewer accountable IPE statements. Statement categorization using inductive methodology identified four IPE student competency and organizational structure/process domains, respectively. Collectively, US health professions' graduates are not required to complete IPE and, therefore, may not be prepared for IPCP. US accrediting bodies are encouraged to collaborate to create a common IPE accreditation standard.

Are We Producing Innovators and Leaders or Change Resisters and Followers?

Education seems to be in America only commodity of which customer tries to get as little he can for his money. (1) The Scottish social philosopher Adam Smith, who gave us concept of invisible hand as a force in society, is often credited with articulating importance of unintended consequences of actions, especially those taken on a societal scale. History is replete with examples of public policy that, while intended to address a societal need, has given rise to long-term, unanticipated negative consequences. For example, generous donation of clothing to certain regions of Africa has decimated local textile industry, exacerbating rather than relieving poverty. (2) In healthcare arena, 1 of commonly cited unintended consequences of our educational and practice efforts is lack of innovation in health care and healthcare delivery. The Institute of Medicine Roundtable on Value & Science-Driven Health Care, whose purpose is the development of a learning healthcare system that is designed ... to drive process of discovery as a natural outgrowth of patient care; and to ensure innovation, quality, safety, and value in health care, has noted that although medical care in United States has capability to be world's best, it currently falls short. Far too often, care that is important is not delivered, and care that is delivered is not important. (3) The Roundtable was referring to health care in general, but we believe that their concerns are especially applicable to pharmacy practice and education. Over past 2 decades, pharmacy education has undergone a major transformation with shift to a doctor of pharmacy degree for entry-level practice. This change was made because of prevailing belief at time that pharmacy practice and pharmaceutical science were advancing to point where additional education was required to ensure that pharmacy profession maintained its leadership role in medication therapy management and ensuring safety of drug therapy. (4) The result of this educational shift was a number of changes in how we recruit, educate, and place our students. While each measure enacted has been intended to advance our education of new professionals, it is legitimate to ask if these well-intentioned actions are giving rise to inadvertent negative consequences. In particular, we suggest that pharmacy educational programs are at risk of producing not leaders and innovators needed to change health care but rather followers who will inappropriately tend to preserve status quo in health care and pharmacy practice. We believe there are several trends promoting this concern. These are widespread and affect our key processes: admissions/recruitment, curricular design, programmatic evaluation, and preparation/advising for career placement. Our concerns begin with how we select students for admission to our programs. There is significant research published on various admission processes used in colleges and schools of pharmacy. The research indicates that our quantitative measures (eg, Pharmacy College Admissions Test scores, prepharmacy grade-point average [GPA], math/science grades) are good predictors of academic success, defined as professional program GPA, graduation rates, and success on national board examinations. (5-9) Although most schools use these measures as key predictors for admittance, there appears to be little research on how good these measures are at predicting applicants' future leadership potential or their likelihood of becoming change agents for profession. Fortunately, requirement of Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) that all potential enrollees be interviewed enables us to combine these quantitative criteria with qualitative assessments. Interview approaches appear to vary widely and ability of these approaches to predict students' academic performance or, more importantly, their potential for leadership or innovation is not clear. …

The Pharmacy Student Population: Applications Received 2010-11, Degrees Conferred 2010-11, Fall 2011 Enrollments

This report presents data that describe the 2010-11 pharmacy application pool, degrees conferred in 2010-11, and fall 2011 pharmacy program enrollments. Data for this report were requested from the one hundred and twenty-four (124) U.S. colleges and schools of pharmacy recognized by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) using five separate survey instruments. There were previously two professional education programs at U.S. colleges and schools of pharmacy: one leading to a baccalaureate in pharmacy, and the other leading to the doctor of pharmacy (Pharm.D.) degree. However, June 30, 2005 marked the official expiration of the ACPE standards to the baccalaureate in pharmacy (B.S. Pharmacy) degree programs in accordance with the transition to the doctor of pharmacy (Pharm.D.) degree as the sole professional degree program in the U.S. Some colleges and schools of pharmacy conferred degrees in the B.S. Pharmacy program until 2004-05. For the purpose of this report, students in doctor of pharmacy programs are categorized under Pharm.D.1 when the program leads to a doctor of pharmacy degree conferred as the first professional degree. Students who have already received a baccalaureate in pharmacy and are enrolled in a doctor of pharmacy degree program are categorized under Pharm.D.2. The following definitions refer to the race/ethnicity groups as used in this report. White refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. Black or African American refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. Hispanic or Latino refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. Asian refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian Subcontinent, including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. Prior to 2011, these students were included in the Asian category. American Indian or Alaska Native refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community attachment. Two or More Races refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents who are not Hispanic/Latino and identify themselves by more than one race. Unknown refers to U.S. citizens or permanent residents whose race and ethnicity are not known. Prior to 2011, this category was labeled Other/Unknown and students that were of two or more races were included in this category. Finally, International/Foreign refers to citizens of a foreign country/permanent residents of a country other than the U.S.