REPORT ON AACP TASK FORCE ON IPPE COMPETENCIES

Paul W. Jungnickel, Ph.D., R.Ph.Pharmacy Practice Section

Business MeetingJuly 19, 2009

Charge to the Task Force

Charged by AACP’s Board of Directors to develop: A nationally defined set of IPPE competencies Mechanisms to evaluate the outcomes of

these competencies Task force combined education and

practice stakeholders.

Task Force Members

AACP Council of Deans Marilyn Speedie

AACP Council of Faculties Dan Brazeau

AACP Experiential Education Section Rhonda Jones, Robin Corelli

AACP Pharmacy Practice Section Paul Jungnickel

ACCP Member and Staff Krystal Haase, C. Edwin Webb

Task Force Members (cont.)

ACPE Member and Staff Heidi Anderson, Jeff Wadelin

AMCP Nominee and Staff Ann Marie Rakoczy, April Shaughnessy

NABP Nominee and Staff Anne Policastri, Eleni Anagnostiadis

APhA Nominee and Staff Melinda Joyce, Elizabeth Cardello

Task Force Members (cont.)

ASCP Member Roberta (Bobbie) Bullock

ASHP Member and Staff Charles Daniels, Douglas Scheckhoff

NACDS Nominee and Staff Shawn Eaton, Edith Rosato

NCPA Nominee and Staff Keith Hodges, Lisa Fowler

Task Force Methodology

Pre-meeting Survey of task force members to rank level of mastery of competencies required at the completion of IPPEs

Day long meeting on Feb 3, 2009 Post-meeting rating of competencies

organized according to CAPE outcomes

Task Force Results

The issue is really competencies required prior to APPE.

There are few competencies that can be solely developed through the 300 hour required IPPE experience.

Competency is generally developed via an interaction of various educational processes including traditional classroom activities, laboratories, discussions, and practice experiences.

Task Force Results: Ranking of Competencies

BE – basic understanding required prior to entering APPEs

BEME – basic understanding, and possibly mastery, required prior to APPEs

ME – Mastery required prior to APPEs BEAO – Basic understanding required

prior to APPEs and mastery after successful completion of APPEs

AO – Mastery after successful completion of APPEs

Areas of Mastery Prior to APPEs

Processing and documenting prescriptions/drug orders

Professional behavior Understanding dosage forms and devices

and how their use should be communicated to patients

Patient self care Some public health competencies

Areas of Either Basic Understanding or Mastery Prior to

APPEs More complex drug therapy management

activities Patient referral to other health

professionals Resolving conflict in practice Communicating a team approach to care Vendor/product/formulary management,

and more complex personnel and systems management

Areas Requiring Only Basic Understanding Prior to APPEs

Some patient-specific information Communication with other health

professionals about a patient’s therapy Understanding medical devices and other

appropriate use, and counseling patients Dealing with ethical dilemmas Dealing with emergency/overdose

situations

Areas Most Appropriate for Competency Development During

APPEs Practice improvement activities Complex medication use

system/improvement activities DUE guidelines Quality assurance activities

Messages from the Task Force

Simulation may be a very effective way to teach some pre-APPE competencies. Further development of simulation activities

and the assessment of their outcomes needs to be undertaken by academic pharmacy.

ACPE must consider preceptor burden, site saturation, and school resources in determining how IPPE hours are established and evaluated.

Messages from the Task Force (cont.)

ACPE must allow schools to experiment to determine strategies that work best to enable students to achieve specific competencies.

Current IPPE hours requirement and interpretation of acceptable experiences limit innovation.

Artificial delineation of IPPE and APPE hours may be counter productive and limit the development of experiences as a continuous process.

Current IPPE process has changed the focus from outcomes to inputs.

AACP Next Steps

Board of Directors discussion of report Assignment of questions related to

assessment options to Institutional Research and Assessment Committee

Discussion of how to approach validation at November BOD meeting

Follow up on relevant programming from Annual Meeting