RESUMO
Background: For decades, the American Board of Pharmacy Specialties (BPS) has provided specialty certification programs for pharmacists. As pharmacists become involved in more advanced patient care services, board certification becomes an essential component to ensuring quality care. The aim of this study was to measure the self-reported knowledge and attitude towards the BPS certification. Methods: A cross sectional study included all pharmacy students and pharmacists at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS) and King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), respectively. However, the administrative pharmacy staff was not included. This is a manually distributed survey was adopted from previous published observational study. The survey included 6 demographic, 12 knowledge and 15 attitude questions where the participant rank from 1 to 5 (1: very poor, 2: poor, 3: Average, 4: good and 5: very good). This study is approved by IRB. Descriptive statistics were primarily used to analyze data. Categorical responses were compared using Chi-square tests. Result: In total of 221 participants agreed to participate in the study based on convenient sampling, there were more female participants (134, 60.6%) than male (87, 39.4%). More number of participants (191, 86.4%) were under the age-group ≤ 30 years. The overall mean age was found to be 25.20 ± 5.86 (20-60) years. Among 221 participants, 118 (53.4%) were students and 103 (46.6%) were employees. The current study found that 55.2% of respondents have a good knowledge about BPS certification. However, only 48.4% of participants reported their interest in pursuing board certification in their future career. Conclusion: Many respondents were aware of BPS certification, learning the most through didactic and experiential activities, and many indicated they are considering pursuing BPS certification. College of pharmacy and professional organizations can help provide educational session regarding board certification and professional development opportunities.
RESUMO
The aims of this study were to document the post market research of the pharmaceutical industry and the effects of labeling revisions on post market studies and outcomes of oral anti-diabetics. A literature search identified post market studies of metformin, glipizide, and pioglitazone. Labeling revisions in MedWatch® were collected as indicators of the FDA’s response to post market drug safety. Data were analyzed by comparing industry and non-industry sponsored studies for the number of pre- and post-market studies, study sponsorship, drug labeling revisions, and outcomes after the drugs became generic. The number of industry versus non-industry sponsored studies was 149 (49%) and 155 (51%) for metformin; 33 (44%) and 42 (56%) for glipizide; and 85 (80.2%) versus 21 (19.8%) for pioglitazone. The differences in favorable results between industry and non-industry sponsored studies were similar for metformin and glipizide. The number of industry-sponsored studies with favorable results did not significantly increase after metformin or glipizide became generic. Studies sponsored by the manufacturer of glipizide reported significantly more favorable outcomes in comparison to studies sponsored by industry competitors (90% favorable, 10% neutral, 0% unfavorable, P < 0.05). For pioglitazone, significantly more favorable results were reported in industry-sponsored studies (88.2%) as compared to non-industry (66.7%) (p = 0.008) sponsored studies. A significant correlation exists between the number of pioglitazone’s labeling revisions and the number of post market studies (p = 0.008). Post market research is guided by the pharmaceutical industry and by individual researchers’ interests. Pharmaceutical industry-sponsored studies support the favorable use of the patented drug and show unfavorable results of the generic equivalent. A possible correlation exists between drug labeling revisions and the number of post market studies.