RESUMEN
Introduction: Pharmacy technicians began administering immunizations in Idaho State as part of a new administrative rule in 2017. Rapid expansion of pharmacy technicians as immunizers occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies demonstrate the success of having technicians as immunizers but, the opinions of technicians themselves about immunizing have not been explored. Methods: Key informant interviews were conducted to evaluate the opinions of certified and immunization-trained pharmacy technicians in the State of Idaho. A key informant interview script was utilized and included questions regarding satisfaction with current position, feelings about responsibility in the pharmacy, confidence administering immunizations to patients, changes patient interactions after becoming immunization-trained, support in the pharmacy, and opinion about expansion of immunization training for technicians to other states. The aim of this research was to gather the opinions of pharmacy technicians regarding the impact of administering immunizations on job satisfaction and career outlook. Results: Fifteen pharmacy technicians were interviewed. All participants believed their role as immunizers improved job satisfaction and feelings of being a valuable part of the pharmacy team. Technicians also believed being able to immunize aided in pharmacy workflow, decreased wait time for immunizations at their respective pharmacies, and increased the number of immunizations being administered. Respondents also believed technicians should be allowed to administer immunizations nation-wide but also felt strongly that the decision to immunize should be up to each individual pharmacy technician. Conclusion: Immunizing technicians in this study believe that this advanced role has had a positive impact on their job satisfaction, feeling valued in the workplace, and likelihood of staying in their current position. Immunizing has also led to positive engagement with patients and beliefs that they are providing an impactful service to their communities.
RESUMEN
The profession of pharmacy is complex and diverse, encompassing a wide range of necessary practice skills. Decisions regarding which skills are essential for students are made by faculty of skills-based laboratory courses, who also determine how these skills are taught and assessed. This commentary aims to further the discussion regarding how the essential skills taught and assessed in skills laboratory curricula are identified, with the intention of preparing student pharmacists for both current and future pharmacy practice. Guidance on essential skills is provided by various organizations and documents, but ultimately each institution has the autonomy to decide what to teach. As such, this piece discusses the importance of frequent curriculum evaluation to determine how to train pharmacists of the future so they will practice at the top of their license rather than simply meet competency with historical skills.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to gather pharmacy patient perceptions about receiving immunizations from pharmacy technicians. Specifically, researchers sought to understand if pharmacy patients were comfortable with being immunized by a pharmacy technician, and also if knowing the technician personally, knowing that the technician was trained to immunize, the waiting time, or the patient age were factors that changed the patient comfort level. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured, key informant interviews were conducted using a 12-item interview script. Participants were walk-in patients from 3 chain community pharmacies in a state in which technicians have not started to administer immunizations, but in which the practice is not prohibited. RESULTS: A total of 46 pharmacy patients were interviewed and the following 4 themes emerged from the resulting transcripts: pharmacy patients support immunization by pharmacy technicians to increase the accessibility and decrease the waiting time, even for pediatric patients; patients value positive, trusting relationships with the pharmacy team, and knowing technicians had proper immunization technique training added to the patients' feelings of comfort; participants believed that allowing technicians to immunize would broaden the technician's responsibilities and balance the workload among the pharmacy team; and some patients still choose not to be vaccinated at a pharmacy. CONCLUSION: This study sought to gather pharmacy patient perspectives about receiving immunizations from pharmacy technicians. The results showed that pharmacy patients support the additional role of pharmacy technicians as immunizers in general. Participants also provided information that can be applied by pharmacy leaders as more technicians begin to administer immunizations.