Parastou Donyai1, Angela M Alexander2. 1. Reading School of Pharmacy, University of Reading, PO Box 226, Whiteknights, Berkshire, RG6 6AP, UK. p.donyai@reading.ac.uk. 2. Centre for Inter-Professional Postgraduate Education and Training (CIPPET), Reading School of Pharmacy, University of Reading, Berkshire, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Using continuing professional development (CPD) as part of the revalidation of pharmacy professionals has been proposed in the UK but not implemented. We developed a CPD outcomes framework ('the framework') for scoring CPD records, where the score range was -100 to +150 based on demonstrable relevance and impact of the CPD on practice. OBJECTIVE: This exploratory study aimed to test the outcome of training people to use the framework, through distance-learning material (active intervention), by comparing CPD scores before and after training. SETTING:Pharmacy professionals were recruited in the UK in Reading, Banbury, Southampton, Kingston-upon-Thames and Guildford in 2009. METHOD: We conducted a randomised, double-blinded, parallel-group, before and after study. The control group simply received information on new CPD requirements through the post; the active intervention group also received the framework and associated training. Altogether 48 participants (25 control, 23 active) completed the study. All participants submitted CPD records to the research team before and after receiving the posted resources. The records (n = 226) were scored blindly by the researchers using the framework. A subgroup of CPD records (n = 96) submitted first (before-stage) and rewritten (after-stage) were analysed separately. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Scores for CPD records received before and after distributing group-dependent material through the post. RESULTS: Using a linear-regression model both analyses found an increase in CPD scores in favour of the active intervention group. For the complete set of records, the effect was a mean difference of 9.9 (95 % CI 0.4-19.3), p value = 0.04. For the subgroup of rewritten records, the effect was a mean difference of 17.3 (95 % CI 5.6-28.9), p value = 0.0048. CONCLUSION: The intervention improved participants' CPD behaviour. Training pharmacy professionals to use the framework resulted in better CPD activities and CPD records, potentially helpful for revalidation of pharmacy professionals.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Using continuing professional development (CPD) as part of the revalidation of pharmacy professionals has been proposed in the UK but not implemented. We developed a CPD outcomes framework ('the framework') for scoring CPD records, where the score range was -100 to +150 based on demonstrable relevance and impact of the CPD on practice. OBJECTIVE: This exploratory study aimed to test the outcome of training people to use the framework, through distance-learning material (active intervention), by comparing CPD scores before and after training. SETTING: Pharmacy professionals were recruited in the UK in Reading, Banbury, Southampton, Kingston-upon-Thames and Guildford in 2009. METHOD: We conducted a randomised, double-blinded, parallel-group, before and after study. The control group simply received information on new CPD requirements through the post; the active intervention group also received the framework and associated training. Altogether 48 participants (25 control, 23 active) completed the study. All participants submitted CPD records to the research team before and after receiving the posted resources. The records (n = 226) were scored blindly by the researchers using the framework. A subgroup of CPD records (n = 96) submitted first (before-stage) and rewritten (after-stage) were analysed separately. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Scores for CPD records received before and after distributing group-dependent material through the post. RESULTS: Using a linear-regression model both analyses found an increase in CPD scores in favour of the active intervention group. For the complete set of records, the effect was a mean difference of 9.9 (95 % CI 0.4-19.3), p value = 0.04. For the subgroup of rewritten records, the effect was a mean difference of 17.3 (95 % CI 5.6-28.9), p value = 0.0048. CONCLUSION: The intervention improved participants' CPD behaviour. Training pharmacy professionals to use the framework resulted in better CPD activities and CPD records, potentially helpful for revalidation of pharmacy professionals.
Entities:
Keywords:
Comparative effectiveness research; Continuing professional development (CPD); Credentialing; Pharmacy; United Kingdom
Authors: Pawel Posadzki; Malgorzata M Bala; Bhone Myint Kyaw; Monika Semwal; Ushashree Divakar; Magdalena Koperny; Agnieszka Sliwka; Josip Car Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-04-24 Impact factor: 5.428