Maria D Kostka-Rokosz1, William W McCloskey. 1. Center for Drug Information and Natural Products, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Boston, MA 02115, USA. maria.kostka-rokosz@mcphs.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe pharmacy preceptors' use of personal digital assistants (PDAs)/hand-held electronic devices and drug information (DI) software for these devices and to determine whether preceptors believed that training students to use DI software for these devices was important. METHODS: We initially pilot tested the survey to 10 Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (MCPHS)-Boston pharmacy practice faculty representing different practice areas. The questionnaire was modified based on faculty feedback. The final survey was prepared using eListen software and e-mailed in early January 2007 to 356 preceptors with an accompanying letter explaining the project. Preceptors were requested to reply by the end of January. Responses and free-text comments were recorded and descriptive statistics compiled. RESULTS: 152 preceptors responded (43% response rate). An equal number reported currently using a PDA in practice compared with those not using one. Of those not using a PDA, 71% reported having other DI databases at their site. Preceptors believed that the PDA was most useful for general DI, scheduling and planning, and performing calculations. Free-text comments suggested that students need to be able to evaluate DI software and not rely on it as the sole DI resource. The majority (96%) of preceptors believed that students should be trained on DI software. CONCLUSION: Hand-held electronic devices were used by preceptors for a variety of reasons, and the majority of preceptors believed that training students on the use and evaluation of DI software was important.
OBJECTIVES: To describe pharmacy preceptors' use of personal digital assistants (PDAs)/hand-held electronic devices and drug information (DI) software for these devices and to determine whether preceptors believed that training students to use DI software for these devices was important. METHODS: We initially pilot tested the survey to 10 Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (MCPHS)-Boston pharmacy practice faculty representing different practice areas. The questionnaire was modified based on faculty feedback. The final survey was prepared using eListen software and e-mailed in early January 2007 to 356 preceptors with an accompanying letter explaining the project. Preceptors were requested to reply by the end of January. Responses and free-text comments were recorded and descriptive statistics compiled. RESULTS: 152 preceptors responded (43% response rate). An equal number reported currently using a PDA in practice compared with those not using one. Of those not using a PDA, 71% reported having other DI databases at their site. Preceptors believed that the PDA was most useful for general DI, scheduling and planning, and performing calculations. Free-text comments suggested that students need to be able to evaluate DI software and not rely on it as the sole DI resource. The majority (96%) of preceptors believed that students should be trained on DI software. CONCLUSION: Hand-held electronic devices were used by preceptors for a variety of reasons, and the majority of preceptors believed that training students on the use and evaluation of DI software was important.