Antiplatelet Medication Management in Patients Hospitalized With Ischemic Stroke

Purpose. The use of antiplatelet agents in patients hospitalized with ischemic stroke was studied. Methods. Patients with a primary or secondary diagnosis of noncardiogenic, thrombotic ischemic stroke from January 2002 through December 2004 were included in the analysis. Patients were then subdivided into four treatment groups and one no-treatment group based on whether they were charged for any of four antiplatelet regimens (low-dose aspirin [≤325 mg daily], extended-release dipyridamole 200 mg with aspirin 25 mg, clopidogrel 75 mg, and clopidogrel 75 mg [as the bisulfate] plus low-dose aspirin) at any time during hospitalization. Patients who did not receive any of these medications during hospitalization were defined as the no-treatment group. A patient\u27s illness severity was measured and compared with other patients in the data set. Results. A total of 44,108 patients were assigned to the treatment group, and 14,255 patients were assigned to the no-treatment group. In general, longer lengths of stay and higher institutional costs were associated with the no-treatment group. Patients in the no-treatment group consistently displayed more comorbid conditions than did patients in the treatment group. The no-treatment group exhibited higher usage rates of both fibrinolytic agents and vitamin K. More patients in the treatment group were discharged to home or rehabilitation, while more patients in the no-treatment group were either discharged to another nursing facility or died before discharge. Conclusion. A retrospective analysis of a large national hospital database revealed that one quarter of patients who suffered an acute stroke did not receive antiplatelet drugs during their patient stay. Outcomes for such patients were poorer than for patients who had received antiplatelet therapy

Recognition of Teaching Excellence*

The 2008-2009 Task Force for the Recognition of Teaching Excellence was charged by the AACP Council of Faculties Leadership to examine teaching excellence by collecting best practices from colleges and schools of pharmacy, evaluating the literature to identify evidence-based criteria for excellent teaching, and recommending appropriate means to acknowledge and reward teaching excellence. This report defines teaching excellence and discusses a variety of ways to assess it, including student, alumni, peer, and self-assessment. The task force identifies important considerations that colleges and schools must address when establishing teaching recognition programs including the purpose, criteria, number and mix of awards, frequency, type of award, and method of nominating and determining awardees. The report concludes with recommendations for the academy to consider when establishing and revising teaching award programs

An Evidence Basis for Assessing Excellence in Pharmacy Teaching

Preparing pharmacists who provide a high standard of patient-centered care and maintain current knowledge and practice skills throughout a long and productive career is a goal of Schools of Pharmacy. An important avenue to achieving this goal is teaching excellence. Quality teaching is greatly enhanced when the institution establishes standards for teaching excellence and develops valid and reliable methods to assess and evaluate it. To assist the academy in defining excellence criteria for teaching, this paper explores the concept of teaching excellence and the commonly accepted elements that comprise it. Appropriate methods to evaluate teaching include a combination of student, peer, and self-assessment. Accepted practices in each of these areas of assessment of teaching are described. Elevating the teaching enterprise in our Schools and Colleges by systematic, rigorous assessment of teaching for the purpose of improvement should ultimately result in better prepared pharmacists

Rewarding Excellence in Pharmacy Teaching

Schools and Colleges of Pharmacy need uniform, valid, and reliable methods to select and formally recognize teaching excellence. This manuscript describes important considerations in establishing a quality teaching recognition program. Factors to consider include the number and mix of awards, criteria, and process of choosing award winners, and the impact of awards on the School or College teaching program. Institutions should critically examine the processes by which they determine teaching awards in light of the recommendations of the 2009 AACP Task Force on Recognition and Reward of Teaching Excellence. The impact of teaching award programs may include demonstration of an institution\u27s commitment to teaching excellence, increased faculty satisfaction and retention, and motivation of faculty members to improve their teaching skills through faculty development programs

Demonstrating Excellence in Pharmacy Teaching Through Scholarship

Evaluating faculty\u27s contribution to the research component of the tripartite mission is based on quantified data, such as number of peer-reviewed articles, impact factors, and the number and amount of grants. In contrast, although effective teachers possess universally agreed-upon qualities, evaluating faculty\u27s teaching excellence can be difficult because of varying criteria. Using objective research criteria and peer review, the ability of faculty to demonstrate teaching excellence may be elevated by the pursuit of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). The continuum of effective teaching, scholarly teaching, the scholarship of teaching and learning, and educational research can demonstrate how this elevation can be possible. Suggested methods for faculty development and institutional change are explored