Assessment of Canadian Hospital Pharmacists’ Job Satisfaction and Impact of Clinical Pharmacy Key Performance Indicators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The clinical pharmacy key performance indicators (cpKPIs) are quantifiable measures of quality to advance clinical pharmacy practice and improve patient care. Although when delivered in combination they have been linked to important patient outcomes, no data are available relating to their impact on hospital pharmacists’ job satisfaction. Objectives: To determine the level of job satisfaction among Canadian hospital pharmacists and whether participation in cpKPI activities contributes to hospital pharmacists’ job satisfaction. Methods: A mixed-methods study was conducted. An electronic survey, consisting of 36 questions, was developed using a validated pharmacist job satisfaction tool and was then distributed nationally to hospital pharmacists between January 30 and March 14, 2019. Focus groups were conducted with pharmacists at Horizon Health Network in New Brunswick to further explore activities that contribute to their job satisfaction. Results: Overall, 284 pharmacists from 9 provinces completed the electronic survey. The mean job satisfaction score among hospital pharmacists was 3.93 (standard deviation 0.85) out of 5. Job satisfaction scores increased with increases in self-identified time spent performing cpKPI activities (r = 0.148, p = 0.014). Pharmacist satisfaction increased with time spent performing medication reconciliation on admission (β = 0.140, p = 0.032) and decreased with time spent identifying and resolving drug therapy problems (β = –0.153, p = 0.030). Three focus groups, comprising a total of 13 pharmacists, were conducted; during these sessions, some cpKPIs were highlighted favourably, although pharmacists described some ambivalence toward patient education. The importance of having an impact and receiving appreciation was highlighted. Conclusions: Canadian hospital pharmacists are generally satisfied with their jobs, and participation in cpKPI activities was found to be positively associated with hospital pharmacists’ job satisfaction. RÉSUMÉ Contexte : Les indicateurs clés de performance de la pharmacie clinique (ICPpc) sont des mesures quantifiables de la qualité qui permettent de faire avancer la pratique en pharmacie et d’améliorer les soins du patient. Bien qu’ils aient été associés à des résultats importants pour les patients lorsqu’ils sont utilisés conjointement, aucune donnée concernant leur impact sur la satisfaction professionnelle des pharmaciens d’hôpitaux n’est disponible. Objectifs : Déterminer le degré de satisfaction professionnelle des pharmaciens d’hôpitaux canadiens et noter si la participation aux activités liées aux ICPpc y contribue. Méthodes : Une étude à méthodologie mixte a été menée. À l’aide d’un outil validé mesurant la satisfaction professionnelle du pharmacien, les investigateurs ont préparé une enquête électronique comprenant 36 questions, qui a été distribuée à l’échelle nationale aux pharmaciens d’hôpitaux entre le 30 janvier et le 14 mars 2019. Des groupes de travail comprenant des pharmaciens au Réseau de santé Horizon au Nouveau-Brunswick ont exploré plus en profondeur les activités qui contribuaient à leur satisfaction professionnelle. Résultats : Globalement, 284 pharmaciens de neuf provinces ont répondu à l’enquête électronique. Le score moyen de satisfaction des pharmaciens d’hôpitaux était de 3,93 (écart type 0,85) sur 5. Les scores relatifs à la satisfaction professionnelle augmentaient lorsque le temps passé à faire des activités liées aux ICPpc augmentait (r = 0,148, p = 0,014). La satisfaction du pharmacien augmentait quand il passait du temps à faire le bilan comparatif des médicaments au moment de l’admission (β = 0,140, p = 0,032) et diminuait quand il devait déterminer et résoudre des problèmes de pharmacothérapie (β = –0,153, p = 0,030). Trois groupes de discussion comprenant 13 pharmaciens au total se sont penchés sur la question. Pendant leurs séances, ils ont mis en valeur certains ICPpc, bien que les pharmaciens aient décrit des ambivalences concernant les instructions données au patient. Ils ont aussi souligné l’importance d’avoir un effet positif et d’être apprécié. Conclusions : Les pharmaciens d’hôpitaux canadiens sont généralement satisfaits de leur travail et la participation à des activités liées aux ICPpc est associée à leur satisfaction professionnelle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".