Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Jacob SA, Dhing OH, Malone D
    Am J Pharm Educ, 2019 Apr;83(3):6597.
    PMID: 31065163 DOI: 10.5688/ajpe6597
    Objective. To determine the perceptions of lecturers toward case-based learning (CBL) and to elicit their feedback and opinions regarding the design of CBL sessions within the pharmacy curricula. Methods. One-on-one interviews were conducted with 10 academic staff members involved in teaching an undergraduate Bachelor of Pharmacy (BPharm) program. All sessions were audio-recorded and field notes were compiled. The recordings were transcribed, and thematic analysis of responses was performed. Results. Four key themes were identified: perceived benefits of CBL, challenges in implementing CBL within the curricula, characteristics of effective and engaging CBL, and relevance and implementation of CBL within the curriculum. Some of the specific benefits of CBL identified by participants included the applicability of knowledge learned to students' future role as pharmacists. Participants also identified challenges such as the design of CBL cases and course time constraints. Respondents also emphasized the need for more training for facilitators in how to design cases and facilitate sessions. Conclusion. While participants identified numerous benefits of CBL, they also identified challenges to implementing this learning method within the pharmacy school curriculum. Paying careful attention to selecting facilitators and providing appropriate facilitator training, in terms of facilitation and case design, is paramount in effectively implementing CBL sessions.
  2. Lim A, Krishnan SS, Blebil AQ, Malone D
    Int J Pharm Pract, 2023 Dec 19;31(6):646-649.
    PMID: 37410964 DOI: 10.1093/ijpp/riad048
    OBJECTIVES: To describe the implementation and assess whether an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) is a viable assessment tool for testing Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) principles.

    METHODS: A three-station OSCE set in a hospital and community pharmacy was designed and mapped to the World Health Organisation's AMS intervention practical guide. This OSCE comprised 39 unique cases and was implemented across two campuses (Malaysia and Australia) at one institute. Stations were 8 min long and consisted of problem-solving and applying AMS principles to drug therapy management (Station 1), counselling on key antimicrobials (Station 2) or managing infectious diseases in primary care (Station 3). Primary outcome measure to assess viability was the proportion of students who were able to pass each case.

    KEY FINDINGS: Other than three cases with pass rates of 50, 52.8 and 66. 7%, all cases had pass rates of 75% or more. Students were most confident with referral to medical practitioner cases and switching from intravenous to oral or empirical to directed therapy.

    CONCLUSIONS: An AMS-based OSCE is a viable assessment tool in pharmacy education. Further research should explore whether similar assessments can help improve students' confidence at recognising opportunities for AMS intervention in the workplace.

  3. Singh H, Mohammed AH, Stokes E, Malone D, Turner J, Hassan BAR, et al.
    Curr Pharm Teach Learn, 2024 Jan;16(1):69-76.
    PMID: 38158327 DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2023.12.007
    BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate an accelerated dispensing course for graduate entry (GE) pharmacy students with prior science-related degrees to join undergraduate (UG) students in year three of the Monash Pharmacy degree.

    EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: A one day accelerated dispensing course using MyDispense software was delivered to 59 GE students. The accelerated dispensing course was identical to the standard three-week dispensing course delivered to UG students. The same assessment of dispensing skills was conducted after course completion for both UG and GE students and included dispensing four prescriptions of varying difficulty. The assessment scores of the UG and GE students were compared. Perception data from the accelerated course were also collected.

    FINDINGS: The accelerated dispensing curriculum was well received by students. They found the simulation relevant to practice, easy to navigate, and helpful for preparing them for assessment. Overall, 5.1% of GE students failed the assessment, which was lower than the 32.6% failure rate in the UG cohort. Comparison of assessment grades between UG and GE students showed no notable disadvantage to attainment of learning outcomes with the accelerated curriculum. However, UG students were more likely to provide unsafe instructions compared to GE students in their labeling for three out of four prescriptions.

    SUMMARY: An accelerated dispensing curriculum can be effectively delivered to mature learners with a prior science-related degree as no notable deficiencies were identified when comparing the assessment results of GE students against UG students when both student cohorts undertook the same dispensing assessment.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links