نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری عمومی داروسازی، گروه داروسازی بالینی، دانشکده داروسازی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی جندی شاپور اهواز، شهر اهواز، ایران.

2 عضو هیئت علمی، گروه آمار و اپیدمیولوژی، دانشکده بهداشت، مرکز تحقیقات دیابت، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی جندی شاپور اهواز، شهر اهواز، ایران.

3 عضو هیئت علمی، گروه داروسازی بالینی، دانشکده داروسازی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی جندی شاپور اهواز، شهر اهواز، ایران.

4 عضو هیأت علمی، گروه داروسازی بالینی، دانشکده داروسازی، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی جندی شاپور اهواز، شهر اهواز، ایران

چکیده

در سال­های اخیر، نقش­های گسترده­ای برای داروسازان به عنوان ارائه دهندگان خدمات مراقبت سلامت، شناخته و ارزش­گذاری شده است. پرسش اساسی مطالعه­ مقطعی حاضر این بود که پس از تجربه­ عملی به کارگیری دانش تدریس شده، دانشجویان و فارغ التحصیلان داروسازی عمومی محتوای ارائه شده در واحدهای منتخب را تا چه حد در ارائه­ی خدمات مطلوب در داروخانه مؤثر می­دانند؟ به این منظور، واحدهای فارماکولوژی نظری، دارودرمانی، فارماسیوتیکس نظری و عملی، و کارآموزی در عرصه داروخانه شهری به عنوان نمونه انتخاب شد. پرسشنامه­ی محقق ساخته با ضریب اعتبارسنجی آلفاکرونباخ برای سؤالات فارماکولوژی 768/0، دارودرمانی 855/0، فارماسیوتیکس 838/0 و کارآموزی 903/0 آماده شد. جامعه­ هدف شامل دانشجویان سال آخر دوره دکتری عمومی داروسازی در سال 1396 و فارغ التحصیلانی که در این سال حداکثر 2 سال از دوره طرح آنها می­گذشت بود. برای نمونه­گیری از سرشماری استفاده و پرسشنامه از تاریخ 02/11/1396 تا 01/12/1396 به تمام دانشجویان، و تا حد امکان به فارغ التحصیلان ورودی 86 تا 91 واحدهای سراسری و پردیس خودگردان دانشکده ­های داروسازی ایران، با ارسال لینک پرسشنامه­ الکترونیک ارائه گردید. تحلیل داده­ها با نرم افزار SPSS22  انجام شد و سطح معنی­داری 05/0>P-value  بود. نتایج این نظرسنجی نشان داد که، بسیاری از آموزش­های ارائه شده در این دروس کارایی لازم را جهت تربیت داروساز ماهر برای خدمت مراقبت دارویی در داروخانه نداشته است؛ بنابراین، نیاز به تغییر در نحوه­ی تدریس واحدهای مرتبط با این خدمت در نظام آموزش داروسازی عمومی ایران با کمک متخصصین امر، در جهت آماده­سازی داروسازان شایسته و توانمند در انجام مراقبت دارویی وجود دارد. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

survey of the satisfaction of Iranian senior year students and graduates of general doctorate of pharmacy with the content of their syllabi and its effect on their later performance as pharmacists

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ladan Nejati 1
  • Seyed Mahmoud Latifi 2
  • Mandana Izadpanah 3
  • Kaveh Eslami 4

1 Doctor of pharmacy, Clinical Pharmacy Department, School of Pharmacy, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

2 Faculty member, Department of Statistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Public Health, Diabetes Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

3 Faculty member, Clinical Pharmacy Department, School of Pharmacy, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

4 Faculty member, Clinical Pharmacy Department, School of Pharmacy, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran.

چکیده [English]

In recent years, extensive roles have been recognized and valued for pharmacists as health care providers. The main question of this cross-sectional study was: How much effective do Pharm.D. students and graduates see the contents of their syllabi in providing optimal services in the pharmacy? For this purpose, the syllabi of courses of Theoretical Pharmacology, Pharmacotherapy, Theoretical and Practical Pharmaceutics, and Community Pharmacist Clerkship were selected as samples. A researcher-made questionnaire with Cronbach validation coefficient of 0.768 for Pharmacology, 0.855 for Pharmacotherapy, 0.838 for Pharmaceutics and 0.903 for Clerkship was prepared. The target population included: senior PharmD students of the year 2017 and graduates with a maximum of 2 years passing after their service commitment. Census method was used for sampling, and the questionnaire was distributed among all students, and as much as possible, to graduates who were entrants of the years 2007 to 2012 from the State and Autonomous Iranian pharmacy schools via sending the electronic questionnaire link, from 22/01/2018 to 20/02/218. Data analysis was done by SPSS ver. 22, and the significance level was P-value >0.05. The results of this survey indicated that many of the content provided in these courses did not have the necessary efficiency to train a skilled pharmacist for pharmaceutical care service in pharmacies. Hence, in order to prepare qualified pharmacists capable of providing pharmaceutical care, it is imperative to modify, with assistance of experts, the way these courses are taught in the Iranian Pharm.D. educational system. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Satisfaction
  • Education
  • Pharmaceutical Care
  • Pharmacy
ANDERSON, C., BROCK, T., BATES, I. et al. 2011. Transforming health professional education. American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 75., No. 2.
AROCHO, R., HILLSON, E.M. and McMillan, C.A.1995. Pharmacist's Satisfaction with their Pharmacy Education: Were they Prepared for OBRA-90?. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 59, Pp. 290-290.
BADYAL, D. K., BALA, S. & KATHURIA, P. 2010. Student evaluation of teaching and assessment methods in pharmacology. Indian journal of pharmacology, Pp. 42, 87.
BELEH, M., ENGELS, M. & GARCIA, G. 2015. Integrating a new medicinal chemistry and pharmacology course sequence into the PharmD curriculum. American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 79., No. 1.
BLOUIN, R. A., JOYNER, P. U. & POLLACK, G. M. 2008. Preparing for a renaissance in pharmacy education: the need, opportunity, and capacity for change. American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 72., No. 2.
BRANDL, K., SCHNEID, S. D., TSUNODA, S. M. et al. 2019. Assessing Students’ Satisfaction with a Redesigned Pharmacology Course Series. American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 83., No. 7.
BROOKFIELD, S. D. 1986. Adult learners: Motives for learning and implications for practice. Understanding and facilitating adult learning, Pp. 1-24.
FAINGOLD, C. L. & DUNAWAY, G. A. 2002. Teaching pharmacology within a multidisciplinary organ system-based medical curriculum. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, Vol. 366., No. 1, Pp. 18-25.
GAUTAM, M., SHAW, D. H., PATE, T. D. et al. 2013. Pharmacology education in North American dental schools: the basic science survey series. Journal of dental education, Vol. 77., No. 8, Pp. 1013-1021.
GRUPPEN, L.D., MANGRULKAR, R.S. and KOLARS, J.C., 2012. The promise of competency-based education in the health professions for improving global health. Human Resources for Health, Vol. 10., No. 1, Pp. 43.
HARDEN, R. M. 2000. The integration ladder: a tool for curriculum planning and evaluation. MEDICAL EDUCATION-OXFORD-, Vol. 34., No. 7, Pp. 551-557.
HEPLER, C. D. & STRAND, L. M. 1990. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. American journal of hospital pharmacy, Vol. 47., No. 3, Pp. 533-543.
HTTPS://WWW.IRINN.IR.
ISLAM, M. A. & SCHWEIGER, T. A. 2015. Students’ perception of an integrated approach of teaching entire sequence of medicinal chemistry, pharmacology, and pharmacotherapeutics courses in PharmD curriculum. Journal of pharmacy practice, Vol. 28., No. 2, Pp. 220-226.
JEFFERIES, W. B., MCMAHON, K. K., ROSENFELD, G. C. et al. 2010. Pharmacology–In the face of revisiting Flexner’s view of medical education. Med Sci Educ, Vol. 20., Pp. 288-292.
KARAKSHA, A., GRANT, G., ANOOPKUMAR-DUKIE, S. et al. 2013. Student engagement in pharmacology courses using online learning tools. American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 77., No. 6.
KERR, R. A. 2000. Curricular integration to enhance educational outcomes. Pharmacotherapy: The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy, Vol. 20., No. 10P2, Pp. 292S-296S.
KING, R., PAGET, N. & INGVARSON, L. 1993. An interdisciplinary course unit in basic pharmacology and neuroscience. Medical education, Vol. 27., No. 3, Pp. 229-237.
KNOWLTON, C. H. 1998. Pharmaceutical care in 2000: Engaging a moral covenant in turbulent times. American journal of health-system pharmacy, Vol. 55., No. 14, Pp. 1477-1481.
MESQUITA, A. R., SOUZA, W. M., BOAVENTURA, T. C. et al. 2015. The effect of active learning methodologies on the teaching of pharmaceutical care in a Brazilian pharmacy faculty. PLoS One, Vol. 10., No. 5, Pp. e0123141.
MONAJJEMZADEH, F., SHOKRI, J., NAYEBI, A. R. M. et al. 2014. Standardization of course plan and design of objective structured field examination (OSFE) for the assessment of pharm. d. student’s community pharmacy clerkship skills. Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin, Vol. 4., No. 2, Pp. 139.
NIKANMEHR, M., KOUTI, L. & ESLAMI, K. 2015. A Review of Integrated Courses in Pharmacy Education and Impact of Integration in Pharm D Curricula. Journal of Pharmaceutical Care, Pp. 67-72.
POIRIER, T. I. 2017. Is lecturing obsolete? Advocating for high value transformative lecturing. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 81., No. 5.
SREELALITHA, N., VIGNESHWARAN, E., NARAYANA, G. et al. 2012. Review of pharmaceutical care services provided by the pharmacists. Int Res J Pharm, Vol. 3., No. 4, Pp. 78-9.
SUBRAMANIAM, P. R. 2009. Motivational effects of interest on student engagement and learning in physical education: A review. International Journal of Physical Education, Vol. 46., No. 2, Pp. 11-19.
YANOVA, N. 2015. Assessment of Satisfaction with the Quality of Education: Customer Satisfaction Index. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 182., Pp. 566-573.