ABSTRACT
Introduction Medical emergency response within the hospital involves an interdisciplinary team, including pharmacists. Pharmacist involvement in these teams has increased over time due to published benefits of their involvement. Development of emergency response skills may start during pharmacy residency, although limited data suggest how this is best implemented.
Objectives Limited data evaluate post-graduate year 2 (PGY2) pharmacy resident training for emergency response, as well as PGY2 program values for this in screening/ranking candidates. A survey may help PGY2 programs improve their own programs and allow post-graduate year one (PGY1) pharmacy residents to identify residency programs that are a good fit for their career goals.
Methods A list of PGY2 critical care (CC) and emergency medicine (EM) programs were identified. The questionnaire included program demographics, characteristics of PGY2 emergency response training, and PGY2 residency program values of PGY1 emergency response exposure for screening and ranking applicants for their programs. A Fisher’s exact test was used to compare differences between CC and EM programs for these outcomes.
Results A total of 85 complete responses were analyzed (response rate: CC = 36.4%; EM = 32.1%). Emergency response training was often with both core and longitudinal experiences (72.9%), although differed by type of programs (p<0.001). Both CC and EM programs considered PGY1 pharmacy resident exposure to emergency response in screening candidates (33.9% and 57.7%, respectively), as well as ranking candidates (22% and 38.5%, respectively). For CC programs, both Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support certification and quantity of PGY1 emergency response ranked as the most important characteristics, while EM programs ranked quantity as the most important.
Conclusion The results of this survey indicate heterogeneity in PGY2 CC and EM emergency response training. PGY1 applicants for these programs should consider their experience with emergency response as a factor in identifying an appropriate program for their initial training.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This survey was approved by the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Institutional Review Board.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to disclose
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
