An analysis of quality improvement education at US colleges of pharmacy

Janet Heather Cooley, Samuel F. Stolpe, Amber Montoya, Angela Walsh, Ana L. Hincapie, Vibhuti Arya, Melissa L. Nelson, Terri L Warholak

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. Analyze quality improvement (QI) education across US pharmacy programs. Methods. This was a two stage cross-sectional study that inspected each accredited school website for published QI curriculum or related content, and e-mailed a questionnaire to each school asking about QI curriculum or content. T-test and chi square were used for analysis with an alpha a priori set at .05. Results. Sixty responses (47% response rate) revealed the least-covered QI topics: quality dashboards / sentinel systems (30%); six-sigma or other QI methodologies (45%); safety and quality measures (57%); Medicare Star measures and payment incentives (58%); and how to implement changes to improve quality (60%). More private institutions covered Adverse Drug Events than public institutions and required a dedicated QI class; however, required QI projects were more often reported by public institutions. Conclusion. Despite the need for pharmacists to understand QI, it is not covered well in school curricula.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number51
JournalAmerican Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
Volume81
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Quality Improvement
Education
education
Curriculum
public institution
Total Quality Management
curriculum
Chi-Square Distribution
Medicare
school
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
Pharmacists
private institution
Motivation
pharmacist
Cross-Sectional Studies
cross-sectional study
Safety
website
incentive

Keywords

  • Medication error reduction
  • Quality control
  • Quality improvement
  • Quality measurement
  • Safety

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)

Cite this

An analysis of quality improvement education at US colleges of pharmacy. / Cooley, Janet Heather; Stolpe, Samuel F.; Montoya, Amber; Walsh, Angela; Hincapie, Ana L.; Arya, Vibhuti; Nelson, Melissa L.; Warholak, Terri L.

In: American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 81, No. 3, 51, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cooley, Janet Heather ; Stolpe, Samuel F. ; Montoya, Amber ; Walsh, Angela ; Hincapie, Ana L. ; Arya, Vibhuti ; Nelson, Melissa L. ; Warholak, Terri L. / An analysis of quality improvement education at US colleges of pharmacy. In: American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2017 ; Vol. 81, No. 3.
@article{bdc9f35ced6446d782cacd59a9c37920,
title = "An analysis of quality improvement education at US colleges of pharmacy",
abstract = "Objective. Analyze quality improvement (QI) education across US pharmacy programs. Methods. This was a two stage cross-sectional study that inspected each accredited school website for published QI curriculum or related content, and e-mailed a questionnaire to each school asking about QI curriculum or content. T-test and chi square were used for analysis with an alpha a priori set at .05. Results. Sixty responses (47{\%} response rate) revealed the least-covered QI topics: quality dashboards / sentinel systems (30{\%}); six-sigma or other QI methodologies (45{\%}); safety and quality measures (57{\%}); Medicare Star measures and payment incentives (58{\%}); and how to implement changes to improve quality (60{\%}). More private institutions covered Adverse Drug Events than public institutions and required a dedicated QI class; however, required QI projects were more often reported by public institutions. Conclusion. Despite the need for pharmacists to understand QI, it is not covered well in school curricula.",
keywords = "Medication error reduction, Quality control, Quality improvement, Quality measurement, Safety",
author = "Cooley, {Janet Heather} and Stolpe, {Samuel F.} and Amber Montoya and Angela Walsh and Hincapie, {Ana L.} and Vibhuti Arya and Nelson, {Melissa L.} and Warholak, {Terri L}",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.5688/ajpe81351",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "81",
journal = "American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education",
issn = "0002-9459",
publisher = "American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An analysis of quality improvement education at US colleges of pharmacy

AU - Cooley, Janet Heather

AU - Stolpe, Samuel F.

AU - Montoya, Amber

AU - Walsh, Angela

AU - Hincapie, Ana L.

AU - Arya, Vibhuti

AU - Nelson, Melissa L.

AU - Warholak, Terri L

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Objective. Analyze quality improvement (QI) education across US pharmacy programs. Methods. This was a two stage cross-sectional study that inspected each accredited school website for published QI curriculum or related content, and e-mailed a questionnaire to each school asking about QI curriculum or content. T-test and chi square were used for analysis with an alpha a priori set at .05. Results. Sixty responses (47% response rate) revealed the least-covered QI topics: quality dashboards / sentinel systems (30%); six-sigma or other QI methodologies (45%); safety and quality measures (57%); Medicare Star measures and payment incentives (58%); and how to implement changes to improve quality (60%). More private institutions covered Adverse Drug Events than public institutions and required a dedicated QI class; however, required QI projects were more often reported by public institutions. Conclusion. Despite the need for pharmacists to understand QI, it is not covered well in school curricula.

AB - Objective. Analyze quality improvement (QI) education across US pharmacy programs. Methods. This was a two stage cross-sectional study that inspected each accredited school website for published QI curriculum or related content, and e-mailed a questionnaire to each school asking about QI curriculum or content. T-test and chi square were used for analysis with an alpha a priori set at .05. Results. Sixty responses (47% response rate) revealed the least-covered QI topics: quality dashboards / sentinel systems (30%); six-sigma or other QI methodologies (45%); safety and quality measures (57%); Medicare Star measures and payment incentives (58%); and how to implement changes to improve quality (60%). More private institutions covered Adverse Drug Events than public institutions and required a dedicated QI class; however, required QI projects were more often reported by public institutions. Conclusion. Despite the need for pharmacists to understand QI, it is not covered well in school curricula.

KW - Medication error reduction

KW - Quality control

KW - Quality improvement

KW - Quality measurement

KW - Safety

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018759698&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85018759698&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5688/ajpe81351

DO - 10.5688/ajpe81351

M3 - Article

C2 - 28496271

AN - SCOPUS:85018759698

VL - 81

JO - American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

JF - American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

SN - 0002-9459

IS - 3

M1 - 51

ER -