Kristen Hillebrand1, Corey J Leinum2, Sonya Desai2, Natasha N Pettit2, Patrick D Fuller2. 1. Kristen Hillebrand, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Clinical Pharmacy Specialist, Critical Care, Cardiovascular Intensive Care Unit/Burns Special Care Unit, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH. Corey J. Leinum, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Clinical Pharmacist, University of Minnesota Medical Center, Fairview, Minneapolis. Sonya Desai, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Clinical Pharmacy Manager, Pediatrics, and Clinical Pharmacotherapy Specialist, Pediatric and Neonatal Critical Care, Department of Pharmacy Division of Pharmacotherapy, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York. Natasha N. Pettit, Pharm.D., BCPS (AQ-ID), is Clinical Pharmacy Specialist, Infectious Diseases, and Pharmacy Director, Antimicrobial Stewardship Program, Department of Pharmacy, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL. Patrick D. Fuller, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Pharmacy Staff Development Coordinator and Postgraduate Year 1 Residency Program Director, Nebraska Medicine, Omaha. kristen.hillebrand@uchealth.com. 2. Kristen Hillebrand, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Clinical Pharmacy Specialist, Critical Care, Cardiovascular Intensive Care Unit/Burns Special Care Unit, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH. Corey J. Leinum, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Clinical Pharmacist, University of Minnesota Medical Center, Fairview, Minneapolis. Sonya Desai, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Clinical Pharmacy Manager, Pediatrics, and Clinical Pharmacotherapy Specialist, Pediatric and Neonatal Critical Care, Department of Pharmacy Division of Pharmacotherapy, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York. Natasha N. Pettit, Pharm.D., BCPS (AQ-ID), is Clinical Pharmacy Specialist, Infectious Diseases, and Pharmacy Director, Antimicrobial Stewardship Program, Department of Pharmacy, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, IL. Patrick D. Fuller, Pharm.D., BCPS, is Pharmacy Staff Development Coordinator and Postgraduate Year 1 Residency Program Director, Nebraska Medicine, Omaha.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The current use and content of screening tools utilized by ASHP-accredited pharmacy residency programs were assessed. METHODS: A survey consisting of 19 questions assessing residency programs and the screening of pharmacy residency program applicants was e-mailed to residency directors of 362 pharmacy residency programs at 105 University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC)-member institutions. Questions gathered general program demographic information, data related to applicant growth from residency years 2010-11 to 2011-12, and information about the residency screening processes currently used. RESULTS: Responses were received from 73 residency program sites (69.5%) of the 105 UHC-member institutions to whom the e-mail was sent. Many sites used screening tools to calculate applicants' scores and then determined which candidates to invite for an onsite interview based on applicants' scores and group discussion. Seventy-eight percent (n = 57) of the 73 responding institutions reported the use of a screening tool or rubric to select applicants to invite for onsite interviews. The most common method of evaluation was individual applicant review before meeting as a group to discuss candidate selection. The most important factor for determining which residency candidate to interview was the overall impression based on the candidate's curriculum vitae (CV) and letters of recommendation. CONCLUSION: Most residency programs in UHC-member hospitals used a screening tool to determine which applicants to invite for an onsite interview. The most important factor for determining which residency candidate to interview was the overall impression based on the candidate's CV and letters of recommendation.
PURPOSE: The current use and content of screening tools utilized by ASHP-accredited pharmacy residency programs were assessed. METHODS: A survey consisting of 19 questions assessing residency programs and the screening of pharmacy residency program applicants was e-mailed to residency directors of 362 pharmacy residency programs at 105 University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC)-member institutions. Questions gathered general program demographic information, data related to applicant growth from residency years 2010-11 to 2011-12, and information about the residency screening processes currently used. RESULTS: Responses were received from 73 residency program sites (69.5%) of the 105 UHC-member institutions to whom the e-mail was sent. Many sites used screening tools to calculate applicants' scores and then determined which candidates to invite for an onsite interview based on applicants' scores and group discussion. Seventy-eight percent (n = 57) of the 73 responding institutions reported the use of a screening tool or rubric to select applicants to invite for onsite interviews. The most common method of evaluation was individual applicant review before meeting as a group to discuss candidate selection. The most important factor for determining which residency candidate to interview was the overall impression based on the candidate's curriculum vitae (CV) and letters of recommendation. CONCLUSION: Most residency programs in UHC-member hospitals used a screening tool to determine which applicants to invite for an onsite interview. The most important factor for determining which residency candidate to interview was the overall impression based on the candidate's CV and letters of recommendation.
Authors: Adrian Jason L Palisoc; Rae R Matsumoto; Jackie Ho; Paul J Perry; Terrill T Tang; Eric J Ip Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.047