MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769703615 · doi:10.1097/ceh.0000000000000166

Positive and Negative Impacts of a Continuing Professional Development Intervention on Pharmacist Practice

2017· article· en· W2769703615 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sukhjinder Sidhu, Sean K Gorman, Richard S Slavik, Tasha Ramsey, Nicole Bruchet, Sarah Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsInterior Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionPharmacistIntervention (counseling)PneumoniaPharmacyPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineFamily medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Evaluations of behavior change interventions aimed at improving professional practice are increasingly focused on impacts at the practice and patient outcome levels. Many of these evaluations assume that if the intended changes occur, the result represents an improvement. However, given the systemic nature of clinical practice, a change in one area can produce changes in other areas as well, some of which may adversely affect the patient. Balancing measures are used to determine whether unintended consequences of an intervention have been introduced into other areas of the system. The aims of this study were to evaluate the impact of behavior change intervention-based continuing professional development (CPD) on pharmacist interventions (resolution of drug therapy problems-DTPs) and resolution of quality indicator DTPs and knowledge change for urinary tract infections (UTI) and pneumonia. As a balancing measure, we aimed to determine whether delivery of behavior change interventions targeting pneumonia and UTI practice results in a negative impact on other important pharmacist interventions, specifically the resolution of heart failure DTPs. METHODS: A quasiexperimental study was conducted at a Canadian health authority that evaluated the impacts of an 8-week multifaceted behavior change intervention delivered to 58 ward-based pharmacists. The primary outcome was change in proportion of UTI and pneumonia DTPs resolved from the 6-month preintervention to 6-month postintervention phase. Secondary outcomes were changes in proportion of UTI and pneumonia quality indicator DTPs resolved, knowledge quiz scores, and proportion of quality indicator DTPs resolved for heart failure as a balancing measure. RESULTS: A total of 58 pharmacists were targets of the intervention. The proportion of resolved UTI and pneumonia DTPs increased from 17.8 to 27.2% (relative risk increase 52.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 42.8-63.6%; P < 0.05). The proportion of resolved UTI and pneumonia quality indicator DTPs increased from 12.2% to 18.2% (relative risk increase 49.9%, 95% CI 34.5-67.0%; P < 0.05). Resolved heart failure DTPs decreased from 14.3 to 8.5% (RRR 40.4%, 95% CI 33.9-46.2%; P < 0.05). Thirty-six pharmacists completed the pre- and post-quiz. Scores increased from 11.3/20 ± 3.2/20 to 14.8/20 ± 2.9/20 (P < 0.05). DISCUSSION: CPD using a multifaceted behavior change intervention improved pharmacist behavior and knowledge for UTI and pneumonia. However, these improvements may be offset by reduced interventions for other disease states, such as heart failure. Strategies to mitigate the unintended effects on other professional behaviors should be implemented when delivering CPD focused on changing one aspect of professional behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.270
GPT teacher head0.667
Teacher spread0.397 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Continuing Education in the Health ProfessionsSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207