OBJECTIVE: To examine work variables for licensed pharmacists for 1990, 2000, and 2004. DESIGN: Three cross-sectional, descriptive studies. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: Licensed pharmacists: 1,623 in 1990; 2,092 in 2000; and 1,564 in 2004. These numbers of usable responses to the three respective surveys represented 54.0%, 42.7%, and 33.8% of those receiving surveys. INTERVENTION: Mailed survey from the 2004 National Pharmacist Workforce Survey; data from the national studies of the pharmacist workforce conducted in 1990 and 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics of pharmacists; work setting, work position and age distribution of actively practicing pharmacists. Work status of licensed pharmacists; proportion actively practicing pharmacy. Proportion of pharmacists working part-time overall and by age group, weekly hours worked by actively practicing pharmacists, and full-time equivalents (FTEs) by age group. Proportion of pharmacists with secondary pharmacy employment; work setting, hours worked, and weeks worked in secondary pharmacy employment. RESULTS: In each year studied, more than 86% of licensed pharmacists were actively practicing pharmacy. In 2004, the largest proportion of actively practicing women pharmacists was between the ages of 31 and 45, and the largest proportion of actively practicing men pharmacists was between the ages of 46 and 60. Across the survey years, the proportion of all actively practicing pharmacists working part-time increased, and the proportion of women working part-time was at least double that of men except in 2004. In 2004, the FTE contribution for women was 0.81 and 0.91 for men. CONCLUSION: The decrease in FTE contributions by all pharmacists and the aging of the male pharmacist population raise concerns about the adequacy of current and future pharmacist supply. As the demand for pharmacists continues to evolve, pharmacy must continue to monitor the pharmacist workforce to show how pharmacists react to changes to better inform projections of the pharmacist workforce.
OBJECTIVE: To examine work variables for licensed pharmacists for 1990, 2000, and 2004. DESIGN: Three cross-sectional, descriptive studies. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: Licensed pharmacists: 1,623 in 1990; 2,092 in 2000; and 1,564 in 2004. These numbers of usable responses to the three respective surveys represented 54.0%, 42.7%, and 33.8% of those receiving surveys. INTERVENTION: Mailed survey from the 2004 National Pharmacist Workforce Survey; data from the national studies of the pharmacist workforce conducted in 1990 and 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics of pharmacists; work setting, work position and age distribution of actively practicing pharmacists. Work status of licensed pharmacists; proportion actively practicing pharmacy. Proportion of pharmacists working part-time overall and by age group, weekly hours worked by actively practicing pharmacists, and full-time equivalents (FTEs) by age group. Proportion of pharmacists with secondary pharmacy employment; work setting, hours worked, and weeks worked in secondary pharmacy employment. RESULTS: In each year studied, more than 86% of licensed pharmacists were actively practicing pharmacy. In 2004, the largest proportion of actively practicing women pharmacists was between the ages of 31 and 45, and the largest proportion of actively practicing men pharmacists was between the ages of 46 and 60. Across the survey years, the proportion of all actively practicing pharmacists working part-time increased, and the proportion of women working part-time was at least double that of men except in 2004. In 2004, the FTE contribution for women was 0.81 and 0.91 for men. CONCLUSION: The decrease in FTE contributions by all pharmacists and the aging of the male pharmacist population raise concerns about the adequacy of current and future pharmacist supply. As the demand for pharmacists continues to evolve, pharmacy must continue to monitor the pharmacist workforce to show how pharmacists react to changes to better inform projections of the pharmacist workforce.
Authors: Elizabeth A Sheaffer; Bonnie K Brown; Debbie C Byrd; Gireesh V Gupchup; Scott M Mark; Miriam A Mobley Smith; Raylene M Rospond Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 2.047
Authors: Matthew J Witry; Vibhuti Arya; Brianne K Bakken; Caroline A Gaither; David H Kreling; David A Mott; Jon C Schommer; William R Doucette Journal: Pharmacy (Basel) Date: 2021-01-13