Perceptions of a virtual interview process for pharmacy residents during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multisite survey of residency candidates, preceptors, and residency program directors.

PURPOSE: To describe the perceptions of residency candidates, residency practitioners (current residents and preceptors), and residency program directors (RPDs) regarding a virtual interview process for pharmacy residency programs across multiple institutions. METHODS: In May 2021, an anonymous web-based questionnaire characterizing perceptions of the virtual interview process used during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was distributed to residency candidates, residency practitioners, and RPDs across 13 institutions. Quantitative responses measured on a 5-point Likert scale were summarized with descriptive statistics, and open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic qualitative methods. RESULTS: 236 residency candidates and 253 residency practitioners/RPDs completed the questionnaire, yielding response rates of 27.8% (236 of 848), and 38.1% (253 of 663), respectively. Overall, both groups perceived the virtual interview format positively. When asked whether virtual interviews should replace in-person interviews moving forward, 60.0% (18 of 30) of RPDs indicated they agreed or strongly agreed, whereas only 30.5% (61 of 200) of current preceptors/residents and 28.7% (66 of 230) of residency candidates agreed or strongly agreed. Thematic analysis of qualitative responses revealed that while virtual interviews were easier logistically, the lack of in-person interactions was a common concern for many stakeholders. Lastly, the majority (65.0%) of residency candidates reported greater than $1,000 in savings with virtual interviews. CONCLUSION: Virtual interviews offered logistical and financial benefits. The majority of RPDs were in favor of offering virtual interviews to replace in-person interviews, whereas the majority of residency candidates and practitioners preferred on-site interviews. As restrictions persist with the ongoing pandemic, our results provide insight into best practices for virtual pharmacy residency interviews.

Major publications in the critical care pharmacotherapy literature: January-December 2017.

PURPOSE: To summarize selected meta-analyses and trials related to critical care pharmacotherapy published in 2017. The Critical Care Pharmacotherapy Literature Update (CCPLU) Group screened 32 journals monthly for impactful articles and reviewed 115 during 2017. Two meta-analyses and eight original research trials were reviewed here from those included in the monthly CCPLU. Meta-analyses on early, goal-directed therapy for septic shock and statin therapy for acute respiratory distress syndrome were summarized. Original research trials that were included evaluate thrombolytic therapy in severe stroke, hyperoxia and hypertonic saline in septic shock, intraoperative ketamine for prevention of post-operative delirium, intravenous ketorolac dosing regimens for acute pain, angiotensin II for vasodilatory shock, dabigatran reversal with idarucizumab, bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy for myocardial infarction, and balanced crystalloids versus saline fluid resuscitation. CONCLUSION: This clinical review provides perspectives on impactful critical care pharmacotherapy publications in 2017.